The Best of The Best
Updated Daily by Tech Labs
Mobiles
Laptops
MP3 Players
Digital Cameras

The ODF Vs OOXML Debate

Subhashish Gangopadhyay, IDF, Sep 08, 2007 2224 hrs IST

The only thing still lacking is the use of IT within India. While we have some of the best global suppliers of the product, our own demand for it is still very low.

E-Mail Print

Computer users are often foxed by references to the on-going ODF (open document format) Vs OOXML (open office XML) debate in the country.

Not surprising that such a debate rages in India...

Indian- software companies have shown remarkable efficiency in the world market, and software engineers have demonstrated high degree of innovation. The only thing still lacking is the use of IT within India. While we have some of the best global suppliers of the product, our own demand for it is still very low. Which essentially means that there is a large market in India waiting be tapped, and given our young population, new companies, and the government's new found interest (appears to be) in good governance, one would expect IT products/services to explode in India.

So what's with the debate? It's pretty simple actually... If A creates a document and wants B to read it, and B is willing, then B should be able to read it. The ability of B to read A's document, when permitted to do so, should be independent of how A created the document. The only requirement is that they both know the language of the document -- thus if A writes the document in English, B has to know English. Everything else is unnecessary.

To understand it better; suppose A sends a letter to B via the postal service. B should be able to read the letter independent of what A used to write it (ball-point, fountain pen, whatever). One proviso though: the address on the letter should be legible to the postman. The postal system would not have happened if addresses were written in ink that was visible only with infra-red glasses. While any pen would do is the open part of writing the letter, legible ink becomes the acceptable standard part of postal communication.

Let's continue with this scenario to get into the gut of this debate... Remember the postcard you sent to your mom to let her know that you reached your destination safely? The postcard, throughout the world, is standardized. That is great if you feel you should let your mom know your whereabouts and that you are all right. However, if you want to write a letter to your lover, pouring out your love, you may not want to use a postcard. Because the postcard is readable by more than just your mom -- for instance, the postman. You do not want your love-letter to be read by every Tom, Dick, and Harry, and so -- you want to put it in a sealed envelope. Luckily for you and me, the postal system delivers both kinds (of letters). Just look at the possibilities -- long distance romances would not have happened if one could send only postcards.

And it's not just the romantic letter. You may want to send a 4-page letter, in small print. The postcard simply cannot handle this. What one needs is the possibility of posting various sorts of letters. A standard that optimizes all that people need to communicate, making room for multiple choices -- becomes an absolute must...

While standardization may help in generating value in network activities (letters and IT), buying into one standard (in this example postcards only) does not generate the full market value of that activity.

The ODF Vs OOXML debate is something like this. The debate is not simply a technical issue; it is an issue for markets to decide. While postcards may be of standard size, it should not be the only type of letter delivered through the postal system. ODF has already been accepted as an ISO standard; that does not preclude the adoption of OOXML as a standard too. If one is better than the other, the market will decide for itself, and stop using the other. This is important because the sector is still evolving, and it is difficult to foretell today how the market will pan out tomorrow.

Trying to restrict a budding market to one set of standards severely affects its development. Observe that this argument is independent of which is the better standard, for, unless we allow both, we will never know!

USER COMMENTS

OOXML is Microsoft's hyena in the sheepskin of an open document standard. Infosys, Wipro and TCS have long back prostituted themselves to Microsoft. What better can Indians expect from them now? The vote on OOXML has proven that even the ISO institution is corruptible. There is no reason for India and the world to attach any importance to this so called ISO standard. ISO will do well to withdraw this discredited standard immediately in order to salvage their credibility. India has done a service to the world by voting against OOXML and continuing to oppose it. The Government of India have got the corrupt patents issued on Basmati rice and turmeric withdrawn. Likewise they should also fight it out and get this corrupt ISO standard withdrawn at the earliest.

by JS Karkada, Bangalore-India, on May 09, 2008 05:40 PM, Report abuse Reply

A better analogy would be to propose alternative standard for electic plug and say that companies can choose which one they will use and market will sort it out. Having multiple standards is only confusing for consumers. If the existing standard does not allow for some cases, Microsoft can help work to extend and improve it so it will allow for all they need. They did *refuse* to do so, instead they try to buy governments to pass through a new standard which is not good for consumers. Also the new standard has several problems, imagine that Microsoft would propose postcards that have address written in reverse order and are made of glass with shard edges and ignored the comments that such postcard would break and they cut your fingers. Also every company who would want to make such postcards could be sued by Microsoft unless they pay them.

by Jiri Klouda, San Francisco, on Sep 15, 2007 11:45 AM, Report abuse Reply

Why is it OpenOffice.org logo vs OpenOffice.org words? The Letter & Postcard analogy is not correct. Both have a "standard": Recipient, Address, Country, Postcode, Required Stamps and message. This standard guarantees that any form of message, just as long as it conforms to the "standard" will be delivered to the recipient. Bringing the analogy closer to the electronic world, SMTP is a great Open Standard which many vendors have implemented successfully. The analogy with MSOOXML is a proposal to ratify a second standard for e-mail delivery, which currently only ONE vendor can fulfill. This is why ONE standard is necessary while Multiple solutions based on that standard guarantees choice by the customers. So imagine the postal service now having TWO types of mailboxes. One is the for the letters and postcards which you are currently used to, while the other requires envelopes, pens, and stamps from one specific vendor. Not only do you have to write in fixed sized papers (MSOOXML restricts the number of paper sizes), but your recipients will have to pay the same vendor to read your message to a high fidelity. yk.

by Yoon-Kit Yong, Kuala Lumpur, on Sep 11, 2007 12:01 PM, Report abuse Reply

Not only does OOXML restrict paper sizes, it also specifies those sizes in its own, peculiar way. Imagine walking into your stationary store and asking for "200 sheets of size 9 paper", which is how OOXML refers to A4. I mean, why use an internationally agreed standard (ISO 216) to describe paper sizes? I think we should all start using numbers pulled out of Windows' Registry. Much easier for everybody that way. Cheers, - Mike

by Mike Brown, Sydney, on Sep 11, 2007 02:18 PM, Report abuse

"others can't implement the OOXML without having a contract with MSFT" A small correction, the Open Specification Promise allows ANYBODY to implement the entire Open XML spec without any contract, fee or other interaction with Microsoft, regardless of the platform that they're using, or the development tools they choose. As for the "missing" information, the ISO process does a wonderful job of highlighting information that would be needed to implement the spec that is not included in intial drafts then ensuring that outstanding requirements are delivered upon before ratification. The phase between the technical ballot that just ended, and the balot resolution meeting next February is designed to do exactally this.

by Oliver Bell, Singapore, on Sep 09, 2007 02:48 PM, Report abuse Reply

The "wonderful job" should be the responsibility of Ecma. Obviously they failed to do their duties as they were rushed to produce a 6000 page spec within a year. If a third party implemented Microsoft Office Macros, are they covered by the OSP? yk.

by Yoon-Kit Yong, Kuala Lumpur, on Sep 11, 2007 12:04 PM, Report abuse

Want to avoid Telemarketers calls ... log on to... National Do Not Call Registration Website -- ndncregistry.googlepages

by riyansh, mumbai, on Sep 10, 2007 01:08 PM, Report abuse Reply

In simple words you should MS office to creat and read the OOXML doccuments and other programmes should not use this format. Then how it is independant? This will compell everybody to use only MS office and should pay more to do this. Now free softwares are in use at nigligible cost then one should use them, why we should be fall pray to Microsoft?

by Vijay, Dombivli (E), on Sep 09, 2007 11:07 AM, Report abuse Reply

OOXML statndard is not complete. It says things like "auto space like in Office 97" or "page break as in word5". And MSFT says some parts are protected by patents and others can't implement the OOXML without having a contract with MSFT. If OOXML is a standard any one should be able to implement it in any platform without MSFT being able to block you or thwart you. As it stands now OOXML is not a Open Standard.

by ravilyn sanders, Rust Belt, USA, on Sep 09, 2007 05:46 AM, Report abuse Reply