

Microsoft Fails the Office XML Standards Test - bensummers
http://www.adjb.net/post/Microsoft-Fails-the-Standards-Test.aspx

======
MichaelGG
"...output documents of the Office 2010 Beta are non-conformant, and that this
is in large part due to glaring uncorrected problems in the text (e.g.
contradictory provisions)."

That makes it seem a slightly larger issue than just the Office code.

Additionally, the comments mention that it's unreasonable for Office 2010 to
support the Strict standard (timeframe), and the author then seems to agree
somewhat.

~~~
ZeroGravitas
No, he's saying it's _unrealistic_ to expect Microsoft to actually conform to
the standard that was passed i.e. that Microsoft are institutionally incapable
of playing well with others and we should all know that by now.

The first commenter seems to have fallen for the usual Microsoft standard-
stalling tactic that has them claim that they can't implement any standard
until it's all signed, sealed and delivered. If they actually gave a damn they
could have seen the writing on the wall and done something about it well in
time.

Rick Jellife (a well-known standards wonk, generally suspicious of anti-
Microsoft sentiment, though like Alex Brown seems to now be disappointed that
they've lived down to everyone's expectations) comments:

" _I don't know why it is unrealistic to expect Microsoft to accept and
generate Strict OOXML in Office 2010: they have had more than two years
already. Most of the changes are trivial or systematic or were well in
progress (e.g., VML had mostly been dropped for DrawingML by 2007) or would be
features required for better support of ODF/Open Formula anyway._ "

~~~
Auzy
Yep, lets all make assumptions on beta-quality code.

Firstly, Microsoft aren't the only ones who don't play well with others.
Openoffice, Abiword, iWork and every other office suite on the planet uses its
own formats.

Secondly, is OpenOffice OOXML 100% Strict compliant yet?

Finally, it's easy for people to stand by on the sidelines and whinge that a
year old bug isn't fixed, or a new feature isn't added. Developers often
calculate an estimated time required for development in advance, and for all
we know, perfect compliance with the standard now may have been pushed back
because implementation would have forced other features to be dropped. From a
business/development perspective, this often makes sense.

Next release if they aren't compliant with strict, then yes, its time to
freakout. But from a business decision, it doesn't make sense to rewrite code
many times before it becomes a standard. And when applications sometimes do
so, the end result is a mess, because the browsers then often need to support
their broken standard, and the correct standard, or risk breaking
compatibility with some websites.

Microsoft had no way of knowing exactly when the standard would be approved,
or how many changes would be made. I don't think this is overwhelming proof
that they are going out of their way to destroy standardisation.

~~~
Auzy
UPDATE: Looks like Openoffice doesn't support saving to OOXML anyway.

So seems the only reason OO implemented it, is to encourage people to save to
their own standard. So, from one perspective, OpenOffice are trying to destroy
standardisation too (they are trying to force people to use their own
standard).

Really, the whole thing is a power struggle to become the dominant format
anyway. Since their main competitors are doing dodgy stuff to help force
people to move to their own standards, I'd say its hardly surprising Microsoft
aren't willing to sacrifice functionality to help competitors.

If OpenOffice were serious about standardisation, they would add support for
OOXML saving, but they haven't yet!

~~~
rbanffy
> So seems the only reason OO implemented it, is to encourage people to save
> to their own standard

"So seems the only reason OO implemented it, is to encourage people to save to
the other open and _pre-existing ISO standard_."

There. Fixed for you.

------
CoryMathews
maybe my memory has failed me but, didn't microsoft just get sued over
supporting this not to long ago and had to change it or they would no longer
be able to sale office?

------
awa
they support odf now..which is a open standard. Also, the author should note
that development of office 2010 had already started when these changes were
asked for.

~~~
ZeroGravitas
"the author" is Alex Brown, convener of the OOXML BRM. Some would argue that
the only reason OOXML passed as an ISO standard is becuase of his actions in
dismissing large numbers of issues. He's well aware of the facts of the
matter.

For those not following the OOXML debacle you could imagine Alex Brown is to
OOXML as Miguel de Icaza is to the .Net platform. He worked closely with
Microsoft to try and turn their proprietary format/platform into an open
standard (and got called a shill and worse for his efforts) and is now
disappointed they've screwed it all up with their shady behaviour.

