Microsoft to Support ODF via Plug-In 269
Apache4857 writes "It appears that Microsoft has finally caved. BetaNews is reporting that Microsoft is sponsoring an open source project to enable conversion between Open XML in Office 2007 and OpenDocument formats. The project, hosted on Sourceforge.net, made its initial release today. The Word 2007 conversion utility is expected to ship ship by the end of 2006, and similarly conversion utilities for Excel and PowerPoint are expected early next year." See the announcement in Brian Jones' blog (Jones is the Microsoft program manager responsible for Office file formats).
Corrected URL (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Embrace and Extend (Score:2, Informative)
Yes. [msdn.com]
Use the Source (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Embrace and Extend (Score:5, Informative)
Double click the MSI file to install the Add-in for Word 2007.
If installation is successful, you should see a new "ODF" entry in the "File" menu in Word 2007. It allows you to either import an ODF text file or export your current working document as an ODF text file (note that during development process, those functionalities might be temporary unavailable).
Important note: The ODF file opened by the add-in is converted into Office OpenXML (Office 2007 new file format) and imported into Word as a read-only file. If you want to save it as ODF, you have to use the "Export as ODF" button and provide a new file name (that can be the same as the current file name).
PR Stunt (Score:4, Informative)
Interesting comments in the blog:
While we still aren't seeing a strong demand for ODF support from our corporate or consumer customers, it's now a bit different with governments. We've had some governments request that we help build solutions so that can use ODF for certain situations...
From my understanding this is more along the lines of "certain governments in all situations." But, hell, MS can probably win those markets back with an Open Office that supports ODF in some way, but as a plugin MS can blame the standard or the plugin writers (who are working on an Open project, remember, not a MS one!). Which brings us to:
Nobody wants a format that's constantly changing, so if you do decide to extend the format like OpenOffice did, what happens when ODF 2.0 comes out and it specifies that feature differently from how OpenOffice did it?
A little late to ask these questions isn't it? Why not just go to the OASIS site (http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php
If Microsoft had gone to OASIS and said "Look we really love this ODF stuff, but to interoperate properly with Office, it would have to support feature X, Y and Z, at least in theory" it would have happened for SURE. However, they were betting that once MS said "hey we won't support ODF" then the "turncoat" governmental offices that had demanded ODF would say "oh... well... poo" and go back to Office.
Re:Embrace and Extend (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Again, I don't see what all the fuss is about (Score:4, Informative)
Ah, but that's the point, see? This isn't about migrating to a single format or the like - it's about knowing that whatever changes happen to the software that you use, the format and rules for reading and writing data are *well known* - open, in fact.
The commercial interoperation you speak of is something that has been painfully bought by those who worked for it. Even now, OpenOffice.org has problems opening Word documents because parts of the format are unknown. It had to be reverse engineered - there was no guide or manual about how to read or write it. Or (getting old now) Lotus Notes and Excel - they certainly didn't convert easily to each other. Both closed formats. I have clients who wanted to review some old financial spreadsheets. They were very old password protected Lotus 1-2-3 files. The client only had Excel. Guess the outcome there...
But most of all, by relying on a closed format, by being tied to a single program to reliably read and write your data, you are effectively putting your work in a lockbox and handing someone else the key. You have to trust them not to lose that key, or decide that your model of lockbox is no longer supported. You also have to hope that the person who has your key never vanishes.
Maybe a bad analogy, and certainly it's an argument with strong moralistic aspects, but there are sound, practical reasons for me to have my data in a format I can access easily and look up the specs for.
On a more pragmatic level, an open format makes it extremely easy to write software that can use that format. I could write a web order system that update an ODF spreadsheet with data on each new order. Or create a custom mail merge program using a template ODF document to automate mail shots from a mailing list. Not the best examples but valid ones - *I know how to edit the contents of the document myself if I need to*.
And just one final note - OfficeXML is NOT OPEN. The spec doesn't explain the parts that contain binary data - data that could include vital formating information for example.
Personally, I feel the more open formats the better. The best will always win through. But if just one part of a file format spec is held back, it's not "Open". And that's where we stand with ODF vs DOC/DOCX. And since it *is* a battle, maybe falling in line behind one certain format is better than pushing several at the same time.
Re:Excellent news (Score:3, Informative)
Microsoft is providing OpenXML plugins for older versions of Office.
The OSS community, via the MS-sponsered project, will provide ODFOpenXML converters, for any version of Office that supports OpenXML, be that OpenXML support native or via the MS OpenXML plugin. Therefore the OSS community will be able to, if it wishes, make ODFOpenXML plugins for older versions of Office, which will work in those versions as long as they have MS's OpenXML plugin installed.