TechTracker: Office Open XML

In September 2007, Microsoft submitted a new office document interoperability standard proposal, Office Open XML, to the ISO/IEC Joint Technology Committee 1. OOXML is designed to replace the widely used OASIS Open Document Format. A key facet of Redmond's proposal is placing control of standards maintenance in the hands of the ECMA International body, a move designed to defuse concerns that Microsoft is trying to turn back the clock on document openness.

One problem: Microsoft attempted to broaden the definition of "maintenance" to include version revisions -- for example, creation of OOXML 2.0, 3.0, and so on. When Microsoft can dictate who may maintain OOXML and, more important, just how the standard can be maintained, it effectively creates a proprietary format. This didn't go unnoticed by ISO/IEC JTC1. The September proposal failed to pass the first-round ballot and was punted back to Microsoft with some 3,500 issues to address, including replacement of the proprietary Vector Markup Language with DrawingML.

On Jan. 15, 2008, Microsoft submitted to JTC1 a new proposal, saying it was confident it adequately addressed the concerns of the committee regarding the original OOXML. The OOXML ballot resolution meeting was held in Geneva in late February; those who voted on the September resolution could reconsider their positions based on the new proposal. To pass, the standard needed to carry 66.66% of members from 104 countries. On April 2, ECMA announced that 75% of members cast positive votes for OOXML. Fourteen percent voted negatively, and 11% abstained.

However, there are hurdles. The EU is investigating the methods Microsoft used to lobby for support, and some countries, including Norway, are crying foul. Serious technical concerns remain, including lingering doubts over Microsoft's maintenance standards. And, the industry still cleaves to the Open Document Format (ODF) standard, which is supported by the OpenDoc Society and used in OpenOffice, KOffice, Google Docs, IBM Lotus Symphony, and other productivity suites. ODF plug-ins have been created for Microsoft Word, Excel, and PowerPoint, and the standard is fully ISO/IEC compliant.

Undeterred, Microsoft continues full steam ahead with OOXML, saying the spec beats ODF in terms of greater document transparency and cross-platform interoperability, decreased file sizes, less chance for document corruption, greater compatibility, and easier integration with extant Office packages. "The Open XML specification provides much greater functionality and flexibility than other formats, as well as more comprehensive documentation," says a Microsoft spokesperson.Microsoft's argument hinges on two key points: that OOXML offers new features and that it can co-exist with ODF. But the big question is, when are too many standards not standards at all, but wholly differing and competing platforms that muddy the waters of document interoperability?Get Back
Microsoft representatives we spoke with stated that OOXML is designed to be backward-compatible, thereby enhancing document preservation, and that it accommodates multiple languages and cultures and supports technologies that enable people with disabilities to use computing devices. Further, the new spec allows data from other systems, such as health care and financial records, to be easily incorporated into documents and to be updated in real time, functionality not present in ODF.

Of course, not everyone is running out to pick up an ODF-to-OOXML conversion tool just yet. In particular, Google, a heavy user of ODF in its Google Docs Web applications, takes a decidedly negative view of the matter. "We believe OOXML would be an insufficient and unnecessary standard," says Zaheda Borat, open source programs manager at Google. "We respectfully request international standards bodies to vote 'no' on OOXML as a proposed standard."

Borat's argument is that ODF isn't broken, so why fix it?

Microsoft counters that multiple format standards can and do coexist, citing image formats, such as JPEG and TIFF, and digital video formats, such as MPEG-2 and H.264. This is, in Microsoft's opinion at least, proof that the computing environment can support multiple office document formats as well, all of which can be complementary as well as competitive.

Still, competing productivity suite vendors may be forgiven for pointing to Microsoft's traditional strategy of "embrace, extend, exterminate."The question is, in view of the new openness we've apparently seen recently and Microsoft's stated support for both standards, should IT be willing to put its most precious asset--corporate data--into OOXML?

Microsoft says yes, citing irrevocable, royalty-free patent commitments to all implementers of OOXML, which both ECMA and ISO/IEC say satisfies minimum licensing requirements. Any entity can freely implement OOXML, and, in fact, Apple, Corel, IBM, Novell, Sun, and others already have adopted (or announced adoption of) the spec on a variety of platforms, including Java, Linux, Mac OS, and Palm OS. Even Google supports OOXML, and Microsoft has funded an open-source translator that's available at no cost and enables interoperability between OOXML and ODF.

That's the key phrase we're watching: "Enables interoperability." Despite renewed interest in OpenOffice, Microsoft is still the big dog on the block, and the most widely used office suites, Office for Mac OS and Windows, already adhere to OOXML. Clearly, Microsoft has the tools and industry influence to get OOXML off the ground. Ultimately, it may be ODF that finds itself needing compliance.