ODF Editor Says ODF Loses If OOXML Does | Slashdot
Popularity Report
 |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Rank
Groups (1)
-
OpenDocument
19 members,376 bookmarks
A collection of comments and discussions concerning OpenDocument and the challenge presented by Microsoft's Office Open XML.
Bookmark History
Saved by 1 people (0 private), first by anonymouse user on 2008-03-27
- Garyedwards on 2008-03-27 - Tags durusau , iso , odf , ooxml
Public Sticky notes
IMHO, the change in Patrick's position is entirely due to the realization that it is impossible to map between OOXML and ODF. I don't know this for sure, but when i read the German Standards Group (DIN) report on harmonization, authorized by the EU-IDABC and provided to ISO, i couldn't help but wonder how Patrick would react. The report definitively ends his OOXML ODF mapping dream.
Many wonder why mapping is impossible. I had more than a few discussions with Patrick on this. His point was that a schema is a schema. As long as the syntax and semantics are fully documented, no problemo. My point is that both ODF and OOXML are application specific; and, both are woefully lacking in "semantic" documentation. Add to this problem that both ODF and OOXML lack an interoperability framework with any semblance of compliance teeth, and the whole mapping issue becomes an impossible solution. Especially if interop is the goal.
Many wonder why mapping is impossible. I had more than a few discussions with Patrick on this. His point was that a schema is a schema. As long as the syntax and semantics are fully documented, no problemo. My point is that both ODF and OOXML are application specific; and, both are woefully lacking in "semantic" documentation. Add to this problem that both ODF and OOXML lack an interoperability framework with any semblance of compliance teeth, and the whole mapping issue becomes an impossible solution. Especially if interop is the goal.
Highlighted by garyedwards
Public Comment