Microsoft "ODF" Plugin

A while ago I caused a bit of a stir within Microsoft when I used the headline "Old Dog, same old tricks". I tried to think of a less contentious way of describing Microsoft's support for ODF1.1, as released in SP2 for the MSOffice suite. I have failed.

So, it seems that the Microsoft-developed ODF plugin fails at the most fundamental level of standards support. It fails to interoperate with other ODF compliant applications. The raison d'etre for open standards is for different applications to talk the same language and be able to treat information in the same way. We don't call a piece of software a "web browser" if it doesn't comply with HTML standards. IE6 is a case in point. I do not know if ODF is a trademark, but if it were I fail to see how Microsoft could use the term "ODF" to describe their plugin. Certainly it appears to run counter to the underlying intent of trade descriptions legislation.

Some really, really basic testing of the SP2 plugin has shown that the support for ODF1.1 has been done in such a way that no other ODF-compliant application can successfully and accurately render documents saved using Microsoft's plugin.

Maybe this is simply an issue of QA at Microsoft and it will be fixed in later releases. Maybe all their applications are tested in this way. Maybe that's why Windows 7 is being rushed out as the "working" version of Vista.

However, I do not think this is entirely the case. Microsoft not only have a track record of trying to bend, extend and break standards to further their own gain, they are like 99.999% of all commercial software vendors. They see standards as a pain in the arse. Something that requires a tick in the box to satisfy a vendor requirement.

This approach is in stark contrast to the FLOSS approach to standards. Free and open source software thrives on open standards. The ability to interoperate with other applications is a major component of project success and sustainability. The attitude that collaboration is a good thing is fundamental to the FLOSS philosophy. This is probably why the Sun ODF plugin for MSOffice is better than Microsoft's.

Microsoft's response to the issue has been amazingly short-sighted. Rather than trying to work with the ODF community and standards body (OASIS) they have offered nothing but aggressive defence, oh, and called for their critics to resign from that body. This is surprising for an organisation that seems to be falling over itself to give an appearance of being "open source" friendly.

Getting back to the subject in hand. When Governments who have insisted that ODF is a standard that they want applications to support, they should consider why that standard is important. When making their purchasing decisions they must consider the cost to third-party applications of using documents that play very poorly with the standard. Not taking this stand would be a terrible dereliction of duty by those with whom we entrust billions of tax payer dollars.

Some links.

Update on ODF Spreadsheet Interoperability - http://www.robweir.com/blog/2009/05/update-on-odf-spreadsheet.html

A follow-up on Excel 2007 SP2's ODF support - http://www.robweir.com/blog/2009/05/follow-up-on-excel-2007-sp2s-odf.html

Our own Matthew Holloway does some analysis - http://holloway.co.nz/blog/2009/05/opendocument-support-in-microsoft-office-sp2-odf/

Does MS Office SP2 With ODF Support Really Work? Test Results Point to No - http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090503215045379

Microsoft now attempt to fragment ODF - http://homembit.com/2009/05/microsoft-now-attempt-to-fragment-odf.html

A Few Facts As Antidote Against Microsoft's anti-ODF FUD Campaign - http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2009050712493241

Finally, Gray Knowlton, who blessed us with his presence in NZ during the OOXML process, calls for the co-chair of the ODF Technical Committe to resign because he dared to test and publish the results of Microsoft's plugin - http://blogs.technet.com/gray_knowlton/archive/2009/05/06/rethinking-odf-leadership.aspx

As I said, old dog.