Office applications Toolkit
Story: Google: OOXML 'insufficient and unnecessary'
ODF better readable but less good for processing
[quote]If there's very little terse markup in OOXML as you now claim, then it sounds to me like you are in effect arguing that there's so little terse markup in OOXML that it wouldn't affect the processing speed anyway. [/quote]
Especially in large files wit a lot of data only a few tags will make up 90% of all tags. By making those terse you improve speed most.
So in stead of you can use and in stead of you could use .
Of course the sizeproblem of tag in ODF is more limited because they actually are not using namespaces prefixes in their markup. A very strange choice for a format that claims extensibility trough adding namespaces. So I guess it is either more terse tags (especially for the most used ones) or dropping namespaces prefixes from your tags.
By using the namespace prefixes it also improves things like XML validation and extensibility compared to ODF. A tradeoff, ODF you can manually read better, OOXML you can process better. What do you think will be happening 99.9999% of the time, processing of the XML in OOXML or manual reading of the XML in it
Full Talkback thread
Story: Google: OOXML 'insufficient and unnecessary'
-
Very nice Albert lars -
Microsoft double-tongued Anonymous123
-
ODF useless for Microsoft needs Albert
-
OOXML is fully open Albert
-
Sorry, the comment was cut short. Here'... garyedwards
-
Reasons for lack of interoperbility in ODF Albert
-
ODF, The Big Picture Goldie Simmons
-
Breaking the Web garyedwards
-
Google has invested in competing format Albert
-
Document standards 2000355890
-
Questioning Google’s objectiveness harpless
-
Microsoft's Argument is Ridiculous Goldie Simmons
-
insufficient and unnecessary standard, designed pu... ator1940
-
Interoperability and the binary ODF conversion di... garyedwards
-
A bit of background... Anonymous123
-
Microsoft moves forward with OOXML SDK Karen Friar
-
The rest of the text in the previous tal... lars -
Google motivation Albert
-
Which OOXML features in particular can't... Chris Rankin
-
XML in spirit isn't going to be as effic... Anonymous123
-
But does even Microsoft Office use OOXML... Chris Rankin
-
Thanks Gary, very informative Goldie Simmons
-
Durusau's proposal is preposterous Marbux
-
A very Interesting Take Moley
-
Features not in ODF Albert
-
OOXML performance explained Albert
-
Office and OOXML David Meyer
-
MS Office 2007 does fully support O... Albert
-
ISO Credibility garyedwards
-
Thank you for an intelligent r... Anonymous123
-
Of course ODF isn't backwards... Chris Rankin
-
Then why add "read"... Chris Rankin
-
00o writes compliant files Goldie Simmons
-
You are contradicting Rupert G... Chris Rankin
-
Terse markup for speed -- NOT Marbux
-
Tail end of previous comment garyedwards
-
Cut to the chase garyedwards
-
ODF also has backwards compati... Albert
-
MS influencing ODF development... Albert
-
No, OOo is not fully complient... Albert
-
MS Office 2007 files fully val... Albert
-
That's OK, I contradict R... Rupert Goodwins
-
Widespread support for OOXML a... Albert
-
Actually OOXML is not really t... Albert
-
Actually MS Office 2007 compli... Albert
-
Actually, you're making all th... Chris Rankin
-
It's a question of greate... Chris Rankin
-
Questions for the community Goldie Simmons
-
Do tell me more, Albert Marbux
-
Albert, give me a single examp... Marbux
-
Open Standards Moley
-
If you plan for incompatiblity... Albert
-
Believe is in the prove Albert
-
ODF and OOXML are standards in... Marbux
-
explaination Albert
-
ODF better readable but less g... Albert -
Interoperability Albert
-
OOXML is Open Albert
-
Then why does the same spreads... Marbux
-
Extensions are bugs, not featu... Marbux
-
OOXML interop is abysmal Marbux
-
Extensions to ODF realistic ? Albert
-
Undocumented eXtensions and St... garyedwards
-
Not 1,500 extensions Marbux
-
You've got to be kidding,... Marbux
