Subscribe

Time to get over OOXML

Since all major productivity software now supports a common standard, perhaps OOXML should be abandoned outright.
Muggie van Staden
By Muggie van Staden, CEO, Obsidian Systems.
Johannesburg, 17 Jun 2008

An international appeal is under way to have ISO's ratification of Microsoft's OOXML document standard reversed.

The standard was approved by ISO earlier this year via a fast-track process that several bodies, including the South African Bureau of Standards, found to be in contravention of ISO processes and policy.

The real question is not whether the appeal will be successful, but why we need OOXML to exist at all - especially now that Microsoft itself has adopted Open Document Format (ODF) in its Office productivity suite. And since all major productivity software now supports a common standard, perhaps OOXML should be abandoned outright.

I have previously written about the standard's situation and mentioned that it doesn't make sense for there to be two standards for the same thing. In fact, this is widely viewed as unhealthy for the market, as the whole point of a standard is to drive cohesion. It is more desirable to collaborate on improving and progressing existing standards than to introduce new ones and the introduction of a second document standard is both unnecessary and unproductive.

Even Microsoft seemingly grasps the effectiveness of ODF - which is why the Redmond software giant voted yes for the ratification of ODF. It has even now adopted the original open document standard in Microsoft Office.

Part of the reason Microsoft has adopted ODF must have something to do with the fact that it has openly said that not even it can incorporate the ISO version of OOXML, which is considered by many to be an immature standard that is unusable in its current form.

Microsoft has admitted it will not be able to incorporate the ISO version of the standard into Microsoft Office until 2011.

And that besides the point that with an existing standard that everybody is able to comply with - even Microsoft - the world really doesn't need a second, competing standard.

It's clear that factions within Microsoft see the value of ODF and support it outright. Which makes it seem that we have opposing camps within the company when it comes to open standards, and indeed open source. One need only look at the mixed messages coming from Redmond about embracing open source on the one hand, while threatening to sue open source companies on the other, for proof of this.

And in the case of OOXML, Microsoft has a third party to worry about in the form of Ecma, a private standards organisation that OOXML was handed over to in having it certified. It was Ecma, not Microsoft solely, that was responsible for the standard being fast-tracked through ISO, contravening procedure and casting doubt on ISO's competency as an international standards authority.

The real question is not whether the appeal will be successful, but why we need OOXML to exist at all.

Muggie van Staden is MD of Obsidian Systems

OOXML should never have been fast-tracked. It was not a candidate for it. Fast-tracking is reserved for mature standards that have not had major contradictions lodged by international bodies - of which OOXML had hundreds, from the SABS and others.

It seems highly likely that the appeal, which at time of writing is being supported by four country bodies, will be successful, reversing the ratification of ISO and forcing a resubmission. But this time the submission will not be fast-tracked if precedent is anything to go by and Ecma will be forced to have it certified the long way, which could mean years. Already, the mere fact that an appeal is being staged has brought the progress of OOXML to a grinding halt and it will remain in a state of flux until the appeal has been decided upon.

Perhaps if and when OOXML is rejected as a standard, it will finally be time to put the standard out to pasture. With even Microsoft adopting ODF, we clearly don't need it. And the bodies concerned must be loath to return to yet another lengthy approval process, which involves ironing out the multiple technical problems that have been raised with the standard.

ODF is a suitable document standard and is already in wide use. Governments rely on it - including the South African government that has adopted the standard for all of its document formatting, and every major office suite, both proprietary and open source, now supports it. The trend of ODF adoption will now increase with its addition to Microsoft Office.

For users, this means we are all able to open each other's documents, which is all the man in the street really wants to be able to do. That different formats existed in the first place seems nonsensical in hindsight.

So when ISO's ratification is reversed, which it will be if there is any justice in the world, it would be good to leave it at that. Because nobody wants OOXML - and not even Microsoft needs it.

* Muggie van Staden is MD of Obsidian Systems.

Share