arstdesign.com — Self professed as "Independent software vendor, file format expert, Not affiliated to any pro-MS or anti-MS party/org/ass", Rodriguez gives us a compelling look to why OOXML shouldn't be adopted as a Standard by any organization.
Aug 26, 2007 View in Crawl 4
Closed AccountAug 27, 2007
And yet everyone including Apple iWorks is supporting OOXML in favour of ODF.
johnfluxAug 27, 2007
OpenOffice supports OOXML?
justathoughtAug 27, 2007
Would you care to explain what those steps would be?
fknightAug 27, 2007
Don't tell people that OpenOffice supports OOXML and don't tell anyone that there's an ODF add on for Office. And certainly, please don't tell anyone that iWork supports OOXML as well. It is absolutely ESSENTIAL that we continue to spread the LIE that only Microsoft can implement OOXML. Get with the party line, buddy.[/digg]
lyricsruAug 28, 2007
Wow great article.<a class="user" href="http://www.lyrics-ru.com/tekct/eric-conrad/index.php">http://www.lyrics-ru.com/tekct/eric-conrad/index.php</a><a class="user" href="http://www.lyrics-ru.com/tekct/evans-blue/index.php">http://www.lyrics-ru.com/tekct/evans-blue/index.php</a>
justathoughtAug 28, 2007
I think that Rodriguez has a good point. He is not saying that implementing OOXML in, say an in house solution is impossible. All he is saying is that implementing it is not intuitive, that implementing it is quite a bit more expensive than doing the same for ODF. I think that a way of illustrating it is with the difference in creating a program with assembly language and with Python. Both are doable, but one of those routes is prohibitively expensive for a small in house team. Likewise with ODF vs OOXML. For most developers, creating solutions using ODF will offer a lot of advantages, including reduced time to market, cleaner more maintainable code, etc.Is this good enough reason not to make OOXML an ISO standard? Well, no, not in itself, but it should be a consideration.
pivovySep 2, 2007
St?phane != Stephanie (It wasn't a vagina after all)