ODF and OOXML must converge!! AFNOR, the French Standards Bod...

Popularity Report

Total Popularity Score: 0

Rank

URL Tag Cloud

Groups (0)

Related Lists

Bookmark History

Saved by 2 people (0 private), first by anonymouse user on 2007-09-25

Grahamperrin on 2009-06-08 - Tags cdf , interoperability , iso , odf , officeopenxml , ooxml , opendocument , standards , 2009
Garyedwards on 2007-09-25 - Tags cdf , interoperability , iso , odf , officeopenxml , ooxml , opendocument , standards

Public Comment

on 2007-09-25 by garyedwards

French experts have determined that it is technically possible to converge ODF and MS-OOXML, into a single, revisable document format standard?

The plan has four parts:

"Firstly, to restructure the ECMA standard in two parts so as to differentiate between, on the one hand, a core of essential and simple functionalities to be implemented (OOXML-Core) and, on the other hand, all the additional functionalities required for compatibility with the stocks of existing office document files created by numerous users, which will be gathered within a package called OOXML-Extensions."

"Secondly, AFNOR proposes to take into account a full series of technical comments submitted to the draft in order to make OOXML an ISO document of the highest possible technical and editorial quality."

"Thirdly, it proposes to attribute to OOXML the status of ISO/TS for three years."

Fourth, "Finally, AFNOR proposes to set up a process of convergence between ISO/IEC 26300 and the OOXML-Core. In order to achieve this, AFNOR will begin the simultaneous revision of ISO/IEC 26300 and of ISO/TS OOXML (subject to the latter being adopted after the aforementioned restructuring), so as to obtain the most universal possible single standard at the end of the convergence process. Any subsequent evolutions will be decided upon at ISO level and no longer at the level of such a group or category of players."

So there you go. A solution that removes ODF and OOXML from the clamy big vendor hands of both OASIS and Ecma, and puts the future of a "single revisable document" in the hands of ISO national bodies.

IMHO, this is a winner. If they (the ISO national bodies) can control the big application vendors, this will work. And it's actually quite reasonable.

They can't even begin to solve the technical challenge of convergence until they separate ODF from OpenOffice and OOXML from MSOffice. The French have proposed their plan for separating OOXML from MSOffice, by creating a basic OOXMl-Core, and legacy compatible OOXML-Extensions. Okay, but what about separating ODF from OpenOffice?

ODF failed in Massachusetts for the love of five lousy generic elements we called the iX "interoeprability enhancements". That's all it takes to convert existing MSOffice documents, applications and processes to ODF.

The five generics dealt with document structure fundamentals that were implemented differently in MSOffice and OpenOffice. The generics are for lists, fields, tables, sections and page dynamics (breaks).

There is also the problem with both ODF and OOXML that "compatibility-conformance" is optional. Meaning, there is no requirement that compliant applications preserve the document markup of other applications. Bye bye "round trip" fidelity!

These implementation differentials break the high fidelity "round trip" conversion required by MSOffice bound workgroup-workflow business processes. And with near 500 million MSOffice workgroups out there, this is hardly a trivial problem. For Massachusetts, California, Denmark and Belgium this is an ODF show stopper.

So what's the problem with adding five lousy generics to the ODF specification?

It's simple. Nothing goes into ODF unless OpenOffice supports and implements that feature. And OpenOffice is unable to support and implement these five generics unless there are significant changes made to the internal layout engine - implementation model.

The iX "interoperability enhancements" wouldn't degrade in any way the current OpenOffice conversion fidelity between MS binaries and xml docs, and ODF. But they wouldn't improve that fidelity either. The impact on OpenOffice conversion fidelity would be neutral.

Where the iX proposals would have an impact is on emerging ODF applications that would design their layout engines to perfectly implement ODF within the new iX interoperability framework.

In the past year Florian Reuter submitted for discussion no less than five iX based proposals to the OASIS ODF TC members. The first three iX proposals were submitted on behalf of the OpenDocument Foundation, and were signed off on by Massachusetts CIO Louis Gutierrez. A fourth iX proposal was presented in November of 2006 on behalf of Florian's new employer, Novell. And in February of 2007, the fifth iX proposal, also known as the RDF interoperability framework, was submitted to the OASIS ODF Metadata SC.

A sixth "iX interoeprability framework" is in the works. It's designed to bring ODF 1.1 and ODF 1.2 into conformance with
ISO/IEC JTC 1 Directives 5th ed., v. 3.0, pp. 11, 145 (PDF), that mandate interoperability.

The ISO/IEC JTC 1 Directives for interop conformance requirements are uncompromising. ODF 1.0 somehow slid through ISO without being held to account. Interestingly, in May of 2006, ISO specifically refused to grant ODF an exception to interop conformance requirements.

Here's a brief taste of what ODF 1.1, 1.2 and MS-OOXML face:

ISO/IEC JTC 1 Directives unequivocally require that standards "specify clearly and unambiguously the conformity requirements that are essential to achieve the interoperability." Since ODF v. 1.2 is intended to become an ISO draft standard, this TC must shoulder the task the Directives place upon it. The Directives provide in relevant part:

These Directives shall be complied with in all respects and no deviations can be made without the consent of the Secretaries-General.
............

A purpose of IT standardization is to ensure that products available in the marketplace have characteristics of interoperability, portability and cultural and linguistic adaptability. Therefore, standards which are developed shall reflect the requirements of the following Common Strategic Characteristics:

    * Interoperability;
    * Portability;
    * Cultural and linguistic adaptability.

Interesting huh? There is the possiblity that come February, MS-OOXML will be put on the three year AFNOR plan.   Next up for ISO/IEC consideration will be ODF 1.1 and/or ODF 1.2. Maybe by May of 2008?

Given the interoperability challenges facing both ODF and MS-OOXML, the world could easily find itself without an ISO approved desktop document standard.

Although ODF 1.1 was OASIS approved in January of 2007, it has yet to be presented to ISO for consideration. Meanwhile, ODF 1.2 is in it's final stages before it too goes before OASIS. Shipping versions of OpenOffice.org, StarOffice, and Novell Office implement ODF 1.2 aspects. We're way beyond ISO approved ODF 1.0 here!

I like the French plan. It's doable. But speaking as someone who has been there, the ISO national bodies are going to have to wrestle the big vendors to get both an interoperable document standard, and, conforming applications.

The expected February fireworks are just the start. For sure there will be no lack of entertainment in 2008.

~ge~

Public Sticky notes

AFNOR has recommended to ISO adopting an approach enabling it to guarantee – using ISO processes – mid-term convergence between Open Document Format (ODF) and OfficeOpen XML (OOXML), as well as the stabilisation of OOXML on a short-term basis.

Highlighted by garyedwards

Firstly, to restructure the ECMA standard in two parts so as to differentiate between, on the one hand, a core of essential and simple functionalities to be implemented (OOXML-Core) and, on the other hand, all the additional functionalities required for compatibility with the stocks of existing office document files created by numerous users, which will be gathered within a package called OOXML-Extensions. Secondly, AFNOR proposes to take into account a full series of technical comments submitted to the draft in order to make OOXML an ISO document of the highest possible technical and editorial quality. Thirdly, it proposes to attribute to OOXML the status of ISO/TS for three years.

Finally, AFNOR proposes to set up a process of convergence between ISO/IEC 26300 and the OOXML-Core. In order to achieve this, AFNOR will begin the simultaneous revision of ISO/IEC 26300 and of ISO/TS OOXML (subject to the latter being adopted after the aforementioned restructuring), so as to obtain the most universal possible single standard at the end of the convergence process. Any subsequent evolutions will be decided upon at ISO level and no longer at the level of such a group or category of players.