Advertisement
Promo

Office applications Toolkit

Story: Google: OOXML 'insufficient and unnecessary'

  • Previous comment

Posted by: garyedwards (Monday 3 March 2008, 7:13 PM)

  • Reply

ISO Credibility

IMHO, ISO has been terribly damaged by this document format war.

Think about why it is that both Ecma and OASIS sought to have their format proposals approved by ISO? What's wrong with Ecma and OASIS? What do ISO and the W3C have that Ecma and OASIS do not?

The answer is that both Ecma and OASIS are vendor driven standards consortia. ISO/IEC is driven by the world's governments, with participating members recognized as National Bodies representing nations, and activities heeling to international trade and finance agreements. The W3C is more of a humanitarian cause, chartered with the future of World Wide Web technologies. Their work always begins with the primary goal of universal interoperability.

Being vendor driven doesn't necessarily mean that everything Ecma and OASIS touches is rotten. Having market waring vendors sit down and come to agreement on standards is extremely important, but we have to see it for what it is.

Consider for a moment the recent Blu-ray - HD DVD battle. Sony led a Blu-ray consortia of vendors against the opposing Toshiba led HD DVD consortia of vendors. The standards winner wasn't decided by some measure of technical excellence or an internationally recognized arbiter of standards. Blu-ray triumphed because of the persuasive marketshare Sony Pictures Home Entertainment brought to the table.

There is nothing new about warring vendor consortia fighting it out in the marketplace. When governments and consumers get involved though, trusting our digital future to vendor consortia simply isn't good enough.

Here's the interesting point about Ecma and OASIS that truly differentiates the vendor consortia from ISO and the W3C. ISO and the W3C demand interoperability frameworks that will guarantee application-platform-vendor independent interchange. Ecma and OASIS have no such requirements for interoperability.

The document wars are just the tip of the iceberg. Look what happened to Microsoft-IBM Web Services initiatives before they finally landed at the OASIS vendor consortia. OASIS vendors actually re wrote the OASIS IPR rules governing all specifications work to accommodate specific web services vendor needs! There is nothing new about vendor groups forum shopping to either protect marketshare or attack the marketshare of enemies. Nor is there anything new about consortia forums like OASIS shopping for vendor owned standards!

The key to navigating our way through this sludge is to focus on the way any standards proposal balances interoperability and innovation.

Vendors, no matter which side of the battle they come from, will argue for innovation over interop. Their proposals will reflect this. The rules that govern their vendor consortia processes will allow this. Competitive marketplace differentiation needs drives profitable vendor innovation efforts. Limiting interop and enabling a larger space for vendor specific innovative features in this context is essential to vendor profitability.

Governments, FLOSS, and consumers on the other hand, MUST argue the first law of the Internet; that interoperability trumps everything. Including innovation.

Universal interoperability is possible. We see it everyday with the wonders of the web. But that doesn't mean it's easy, or that we can afford to put our guard down for even one moment. We MUST demand that formats are open, unencumbered, designed from the start for universal interop, web ready, and entirely application-platform-vendor independent.

One last thought. No matter what happens at ISO, we all lose. If ISO approves OOXML, we lose our precious Internet as a universal platform of access, exchange and collaborative computing. If ISO kills OOXML, Microsoft will eXtend and enhance ODF as needed because that is how ODF is designed. There is no ODF interop framework or accompanying compliance-conformance tests. So ODF ZERO interop will rule, and our expectations for

garyedwards

garyedwards
IT Consultant, Redwood City, California USA
Member since: February 2008

Site Activity Rating:

2

 


  • Previous comment

  • Reply to this comment
  • Return to story
  • Report this as offensive


Full Talkback thread

Story: Google: OOXML 'insufficient and unnecessary'

  1. Very nice Albert lars
  2. Microsoft double-tongued Anonymous123
  3. ODF useless for Microsoft needs Albert
  4. OOXML is fully open Albert
  5. Sorry, the comment was cut short. Here'... garyedwards
  6. Reasons for lack of interoperbility in ODF Albert
  7. ODF, The Big Picture Goldie Simmons
  8. Breaking the Web garyedwards
  9. Google has invested in competing format Albert
  10. Document standards 2000355890
  11. Questioning Google’s objectiveness harpless
  12. Microsoft's Argument is Ridiculous Goldie Simmons
  13. insufficient and unnecessary standard, designed pu... ator1940
  14. Interoperability and the binary ODF conversion di... garyedwards
  15. A bit of background... Anonymous123
  16. Microsoft moves forward with OOXML SDK Karen Friar ZD
  17. The rest of the text in the previous tal... lars
  18. Google motivation Albert
  19. Which OOXML features in particular can't... Chris Rankin
  20. XML in spirit isn't going to be as effic... Anonymous123
  21. But does even Microsoft Office use OOXML... Chris Rankin
  22. Thanks Gary, very informative Goldie Simmons
  23. Durusau's proposal is preposterous Marbux
  24. A very Interesting Take Moley
  25. Features not in ODF Albert
  26. OOXML performance explained Albert
  27. Office and OOXML David Meyer ZD
  28. MS Office 2007 does fully support O... Albert
  29. ISO Credibility garyedwards
  30. Thank you for an intelligent r... Anonymous123
  31. Of course ODF isn't backwards... Chris Rankin
  32. Then why add "read"... Chris Rankin
  33. 00o writes compliant files Goldie Simmons
  34. You are contradicting Rupert G... Chris Rankin
  35. Terse markup for speed -- NOT Marbux
  36. Tail end of previous comment garyedwards
  37. Cut to the chase garyedwards
  38. ODF also has backwards compati... Albert
  39. MS influencing ODF development... Albert
  40. No, OOo is not fully complient... Albert
  41. MS Office 2007 files fully val... Albert
  42. That's OK, I contradict R... Rupert Goodwins ZD
  43. Widespread support for OOXML a... Albert
  44. Actually OOXML is not really t... Albert
  45. Actually MS Office 2007 compli... Albert
  46. Actually, you're making all th... Chris Rankin
  47. It's a question of greate... Chris Rankin
  48. Questions for the community Goldie Simmons
  49. Do tell me more, Albert Marbux
  50. Albert, give me a single examp... Marbux
  51. Open Standards Moley
  52. If you plan for incompatiblity... Albert
  53. Believe is in the prove Albert
  54. ODF and OOXML are standards in... Marbux
  55. explaination Albert
  56. ODF better readable but less g... Albert
  57. Interoperability Albert
  58. OOXML is Open Albert
  59. Then why does the same spreads... Marbux
  60. Extensions are bugs, not featu... Marbux
  61. OOXML interop is abysmal Marbux
  62. Extensions to ODF realistic ? Albert
  63. Undocumented eXtensions and St... garyedwards
  64. Not 1,500 extensions Marbux
  65. You've got to be kidding,... Marbux

Back to: Google: OOXML 'insufficient and unnecessary'


Video icon

Video

Discussions

lezlow lezlow

when it comes with power supply you,ll...

Saturday 5 December 2009, 9:42 PM

3 comments
lezlow lezlow

yer

Saturday 5 December 2009, 9:40 PM

1 comment
lezlow lezlow

HP workers set dates for strikes

Saturday 5 December 2009, 9:39 PM

2 comments
lezlow lezlow

what happened to IPv5?

Saturday 5 December 2009, 9:38 PM

1 comment

Vista Upgrade Blog

Can I have fries with that? (Consumer...

Licence policies of Tech company's have been for a long time both complicated and 'Dick Turpin-esque', people just click 'I agree' without reading the Agreement. I do the same, but... More

1 comment

This Crap Site

How utterly stupid - I am ranked #40 in the top 100 - as a member of this site..... I mean HOW utterly stupid.... I have done sweet FA, I have only rejoined this site after a 3 or... More

2 comments

Microsoft Security Update: November Pa...

Apologies for this late update to our core Patch Tuesday update. Here is a summary of the update .... The November Patch Tuesday update from Microsoft follows the largest patch and... More

Post a comment


Skip Sub Navigation Links to CNET Brand Links

Help

Become part of the ZDNet community.

Newsletters