Welcome!

XML Authors: Arthur Hefti, NeonDrum News, Katharine Hadow, Corey Roth, Bill Roth

Related Topics: XML

XML: Article

Microsoft Pushes OOXML Over the Top

Microsoft Has Gotten Enough Votes to Make Its Open Office XML File Format (OOXML), the Default File Format in Office 2007

Microsoft has gotten enough votes to make its Open Office XML file format (OOXML), the default file format in Office 2007, an ISO standard, theoretically saving Office from being run out of town by a lot of ODF-smitten government agencies.

There have been, as everyone must know by now, myriad accusations of chicanery, undo pressure, committee-stacking, ballot box-stuffing and other voting irregularities – on both sides of the aisle actually – Microsoft points an accusing finger at IBM, an ODF supporter, as Sun did during the aborted Java standards process for poisoning wells – and right after the results were in CNET reported that the allegations roused the European Commission – which, let’s face it, has what can only be described as a hard on for Microsoft – to investigate.

It reportedly asked Norway about any undue influence brought to bear after a Norwegian official Steve Pepper claimed Norway’s Yes vote should be thrown out as not representative of the majority opinion.

Seems the administrative group voted Aye although most of the companies it represented said Nay. However, Standards Norway, the national standards body, is hanging tough and not backing down.

Of course the EC, which openly favors ODF, is already embarked on a major investigation of Office and OOXML and has already asked ISO members whether Microsoft was using strong-arm tactics to get OOXML standardized.

Because of these accusations Microsoft may still have to survive any formal challenges made during the next two months.

Microsoft, in fact, is counting on it. Its director of corporate standards, Jason Matusow, blogged that he expects IBM to instigate them.

“We now see IBM/et al,” he wrote Wednesday, “driving an orchestrated process attack in hopes of overturning the ratification of Open XML, or at least to discredit what has come out of this long, global process.”

On the surface, at least, IBM VP Bob Sutor is taking the high road and calling for reform of the standards process as well as accommodation between ODF and OOXML.

Anyway, according to ISO’s official pronouncement Wednesday OOXML wound up with 75% of the vote for and 14% against, a wider margin than many expected.

However, there are many who will gag over ISO’s flat assertion that the 3,500 comments raised as issues on the way to the weekend vote were seriously addressed and resolved – even after they were whittled down to 1,000. There simply wasn’t enough time. Heck, they had to bend the rules at the Ballot Resolution Meeting last month because there wasn’t enough time to deal with the thousand comments.

See this is the second time through – Microsoft lost the first vote back in September – but according to ISO the issues were resolved enough for places like Norway, South Korea, Ireland, the Czech Republic, Denmark, the Philippines and South Korea to change their No votes to Yes as did Finland, which previously abstained.

Cuba and Venezuela changed their Yes notes to No, and Kenya, which previously voted Yes, abstained. New Zealand issued a statement Sunday after the vote closed opposing Microsoft.

Germany voted Yes again, India said No again and Australia and Holland continued to abstain.

The German and Polish votes may be dicey. At least that’s what some claim.

OOXML was standardized by ECMA, which put it on the fast track to ISO standardization in December of 2006.

ODF is the default format in OpenOffice and its spin-offs like IBM’s Lotus Symphony and Sun’s StarOffice.

It was made an ISO standard in May of 2006 and OOXML opponents argue that making OOXML a standard too would be one standard too many. Of course ODF didn’t get OOXML’s kind of scrutiny and may not be able to bear it.

Barring some upset, OOXML is now ISO/IEC 29500 as well as ECMA standard 376 – or will be when it’s published and Lord knows how long that will take. Further development will now move from ECMA to ISO. And it will start with issues that surfaced during the voting process.

More Stories By Maureen O'Gara

Maureen O'Gara the most read technology reporter for the past 20 years, is the Cloud Computing and Virtualization News Desk editor of SYS-CON Media. She is the publisher of famous "Billygrams" and the editor-in-chief of "Client/Server News" for more than a decade. One of the most respected technology reporters in the business, Maureen can be reached by email at maureen(at)sys-con.com or paperboy(at)g2news.com, and by phone at 516 759-7025.

Comments (2) View Comments

Share your thoughts on this story.

Add your comment
You must be signed in to add a comment. Sign-in | Register

In accordance with our Comment Policy, we encourage comments that are on topic, relevant and to-the-point. We will remove comments that include profanity, personal attacks, racial slurs, threats of violence, or other inappropriate material that violates our Terms and Conditions, and will block users who make repeated violations. We ask all readers to expect diversity of opinion and to treat one another with dignity and respect.


Most Recent Comments
Ms. O. Penoraface Exemel 04/15/08 03:44:15 PM EDT

With some 6,000 pages of items specifying thousands of details in Microsoft's OOXML standard, and the many thousands of hooks into Microsoft patented, licensed and copyright-controlled, proprietary and closed code, it truly begs the question, even though it is now declared an ISO standard, of who else besides Microsoft will be able to use, or want to, or even bother to use, OOXML?

Given that using it, in an IP-safe and productive manner, requires a huge investment in time understanding it, and then coding and testing to meet the protocol, and then, after completing working code, developers have to address implicit and significant IP exposure. These IP risks would require significant pre-emptive legal negotiations, licensing, cross-patenting, and even so, they may incur post-implementation legal hassles from Microsoft or one or more of it's Platinum circle of allies. Microsoft and it's corporate allies are used to having a mono-culture, with major legal leverage to enforce it. Sharing might not come as easily in practice as on paper.

This ISO 'standard', for those daring enough and rich enough to try to implement it, and this may be limited to those having a stable of IP lawyers at beck and call, may be DOA to the rest of real world IT applications developers.

Outside of Microsoft's Platinum circle, OOXML may be percieved as a Pandora's Box full of unleashed legal hazards. Hazards ensuring continued full employment of Microsoft's stable of 700 lawyers.

Most OSS developers will peceive OOXML as requiring them to jump too high of legal hurdles and too many technical ones. Microsoft will have to do a major persuassion campaign to demonstrate it may be worth it to try to leap all the high hurdles. It won't be easy, since I'm sure to most OSS developers these hurdles appear as very tall legal 'Kick-Me!' billboards.

So, if OOXML is not adopted by the non-Platinum, non-first tier vendors, and is ignored by the world's OSS developers, won't this mean that Microsoft actually ends up losing for winning? Microsoft requires developers to maintain a high interest in continued interoperation with Windows and it's Office suite, in order to profitably survive in the later 21st Century. How long until Microsoft realizes it may have successfully built, and forced upon the world, the adoption of what ends up a 6000 page IP white-elephant, or possibly a shareholder foot-gun?

Let's compare Microsoft's OOXML standard to a jet that may be yet built by several nations via controlled technology sharing, since the complexities and terms may end up quite similar. Suppose the F-22's schematics are made an ISO standard, well, at least the non-classified sections. If the average Joe developer isn't ever going to have, or want, access to the necessary classified schematic sections, or to the expensive interfacing parts--key ones only being available from single classified sources--and very proprietary, or be able to afford or have access to military grade jet fuel, why would Joe want to do so? How can Joe do so?

If Joe cares to build something that does a basic fly from point A to B office software function, Joe won't be interesting in to tying into anything as complex as that F-22 option. Joe has much easier options, fully-developed, fully-open options, ODF, available now, with little hassle to use, and with working software modules available to learn from and re-use. And if Joe's stingy clients prefer the low cost, high reliability and rapid delivery of an ODF solution, well, doesn't that mean it's a lose-lose deal for Microsoft and it's exotic OOXML?

Foo Bar 04/07/08 07:37:39 PM EDT

Very good review!!! Congratulations to the writer, who have researched all the point of views.