Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:42, 30 September 2007

Template:Distinguish2

Office Open XML (commonly referred to as OOXML or Open XML) is an XML-based file format specification for electronic documents such as spreadsheets, charts, presentations and word processing documents. The specification was developed by Microsoft as a successor of its binary office file formats and was handed over to Ecma International to be published as the Ecma 376 standard in December 2006. The format specification is available for free at Ecma International.

Office Open XML uses XML markup language in files that are placed in an Open Packaging Convention package.

The format is currently undergoing a standardization fast-track process within the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) as DIS 29500 (Draft International Standard 29500), but has not (as of September 2007 ballot) reached approval from the ISO national body members. A ballot resolution meeting in February 2008 will resolve the fast-track proposal with an approval or disapproval.

Background

Since its inception, Microsoft Office and its component applications such as Microsoft Word and Excel have used binary file formats for electronic office documents. Historically, these formats have been difficult to implement due to a lack of publicly available information and royalty-free access to the format specifications, although Microsoft currently offers these binary format specifications under a royalty free covenant not to sue . Despite these difficulties a level of support has been achieved, though full interoperability has remained elusive.

In 2000, Microsoft released an initial version of an XML based format for Excel, then in 2002 a new file format for MS Word followed. These formats were later incorporated into the 2003 release of Microsoft Office 2003, known as Office 2003 XML formats.

In 2004 governments and the European Union recommended to Microsoft that they publish and standardise their XML Office formats through a standardisation organisation. . Microsoft decided in December 2005 to standardise the new version of their Microsoft Office XML format through Ecma (renamed as Ecma Office Open XML).

File format and structure

In the earlier form of these formats, prior to ECMA standardization, the Microsoft Office 2003 XML formats used a single monolithic file with embedded items like pictures as binary encoded blocks within the XML. Office Open XML does no longer support those but uses a filepackage conforming to the Open Packaging Convention. This format uses the ZIP (file format) and contains the individual files that form the basis of the document. In addition to Office markup, the package can also include embedded (binary) files in formats such as PNG, BMP, AVI or PDF.

Document markup languages

An Office Open XML file may contain several documents encoded in specialized markup languages corresponding to applications within the Microsoft Office product line. Office Open XML defines multiple vocabularies (using 27 namespaces and 89 schema modules.) The primary markup languages are, WordprocessingML for Word-processing, SpreadsheetML for Spreadsheets, and PresentationML for presentations. DrawingML is used for vector drawing, charts, and for example, text art. Additionally, though deprecated, VML is supported for drawing.

Shared markup language materials include:

• Office Math Markup Language (OMML)
• Extended properties
• Custom properties
• Variant Types
• Custom XML data properties
• Bibliography

In addition to the above markup languages custom XML schema's can be used to extend Office Open XML.

The XML Schema of OOXML emphasizes reducing load time and improving parsing speed. In a test with applications current in April 2007, XML based office documents were slower to load than binary formats. For speed, OOXML uses very short element names for common elements and spreadsheets save dates as index numbers (starting from 1899 or from 1904). In order to be systematic and generic, OOXML typically uses separate child elements for data and metadata (element names ending in Pr for properties) rather than using multiple attributes, which allows structured properties. OOXML does not use mixed content but uses elements to put a series of text runs (element name r) into paragraphs (element name p). The result is terse and highly nested in contrast to HTML, for example, which is fairly flat, designed for humans to write in text editors and is more or less congenial for humans to read.

OMML

Office Math Markup Language is a mathematical markup language which can be embedded in WordprocessingML, with intrinsic support for including word processing markup like revision markings, footnotes, comments, images and elaborate formatting and styles. The format is different from the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) MathML recommendation, but is partially compatible through relatively simple XSL Transformations.

DrawingML

DrawingML is the graphics markup language, its major features are the graphics rendering of text elements, graphical vector based shape elements, graphical tables and charts.

The DrawingML table is the third table model in Office Open XML (next to the tablemodels in WordprocessingML and SpreadsheetML) and is optimized for graphical effects and its main use is in presentations created with PresentationML markup. DrawingML contains graphics effects (like shadows and reflection) that can be used on the different graphical elements that are used in DrawingML. In DrawingML you can also create 3d effects, for instance to show the different graphical elements trough a flexible camera viewpoint. It is possible to create separate DrawingML theme parts in an Office Open XML package. These themes can then be applied to graphical elements throughout the Office Open XML package.

Container structure

Office Open XML packages have characteristically different directory structures and names depending on the type of document. An application will use the relationships files to locate individual sections (files), with each having accompanying metadata, in particular MIME metadata.

Office Open XML format uses a ZIP package for storing XML and other data files.

A basic package contains an XML file called .xml at the root, along with three directories: _rels, docProps, and a directory specific for the document type (for example, in a .docx word processing package, there would be a word directory). The word directory contains the document.xml file which is the core content of the document.

.xml

This file describes the contents of the package. It also contains a mapping for file extensions and overrides for specific URIs.

_rels

This directory contains relationships for the files within the package. To find the relationships for a specific file, look for the _rels directory that is a sibling of the file, and then for a file that has the original file name with a .rels appended to it. For example, if the content types file had any relationships, there would be a file called inside the _rels directory.

_rels/.rel

This file is where the package relationships are located. Applications look here first. Viewing in a text editor, one will see it outlines each relationship for that section. In a minimal document containing only the basic document.xml file, the relationships detailed are metadata and document.xml.

word/document.xml

This file is the main part for any Word document. Viewed in an XML editor, one will see a pretty basic XML file.

Relationships

Relationship files in Office Open XML

An example relationship file (from word/_rels/document.xml.rels)

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<Relationships
  xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/package/2005/06/relationships">
  <Relationship Id="rId1"
     Type="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/relationships/image"
     Target="http://en.wikipedia.org/images/wiki-en.png"
     TargetMode="External" />
  <Relationship Id="rId2"
     Type="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/relationships/hyperlink"
     Target="http://www.wikipedia.org"
     TargetMode="External" />
</Relationships>

As such, images referenced in the document can be found in the relationship file by looking for all relationships that are of type http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/relationships/image. To change the used image, edit the relationship.

Hyperlink relations

The following code shows an example of inline markup for a hyperlink:

<w:hyperlink w:rel="rId2" w:history="1"> 

In this example, the URL is represented by "rId2". The actual URL is in the accompanying relationships file, located by the corresponding "rId2" item. Linked images, templates, and other items are referenced in the same way.

Embedded or linked media file relations

Pictures can be embedded or linked using a tag:

<v:imagedata w:rel="rId1" o:title="example" />

This is the reference to the image file. All references are managed via relationships. For example, a document.xml has a relationship to the image. There is a _rels directory in the same directory as document.xml, inside _rels is a file called document.xml.rels. In this file there will be a relationship definition that contains type, ID and location. The ID is the referenced ID used in the XML document. The type will be a reference schema definition for the media type and the location will be an internal location within the ZIP package or an external location defined with an URL.

Licensing

Ecma International provides specifications that “can be freely copied by all interested parties without restrictions” and under the Ecma code of conduct in patent matters which requires participating and approving member organisations to make available their patent rights under a reasonable and non-discriminatory basis (see Reasonable and Non Discriminatory Licensing). These "reasonable and non-discriminatory" are common minimum patent conditions for a standard. International standardization adheres to a clear preference for royalty-free patent licensing. That is why Microsoft, which is a main contributor to the standard, provided a Covenant Not to Sue for its patent licensing. The covenant received a mixed reception, with some (like Groklaw) identifying problems and others (such as Lawrence Rosen) endorsing it.

Microsoft also added the format to their Open Specification Promise in which Microsoft irrevocably promises “not to assert any Microsoft Necessary Claims against you for making, using, selling, offering for sale, importing or distributing any implementation to the extent it conforms to a Covered Specification ("Covered Implementation")”.

The format can therefore be used under the Covenant Not to Sue or the Open Specification Promise.

In support of the licensing arrangements Microsoft commissioned an analysis from the London legal firm Baker & Mckenzie.

The Open Specification Promise was included in documents submitted to ISO in support of the Ecma 376 fast track submission.. In response to criticism of the licensing, ECMA provided the following statements:"

• Contributions to Ecma were made under the Ecma Code of Conduct in Patent Matters...
• The OSP enables both open source and commercial software to implement DIS 29500."

With Ecma International publishing the specification for free and patents made irrevocably available on a royalty-free basis, Office Open XML conforms to all characteristics of the European Union's definition of an open standard.

Standardization

Template:Future software

Standardization within Ecma International

Microsoft submitted Office Open XML to the Ecma International standardization process to make it an open standard. Ecma formed a technical committee (TC45) in order to produce and maintain a "formal standard for office productivity applications that is fully compatible with the Office Open XML Formats, submitted by Microsoft". The technical committee is chaired by Microsoft and includes members from Apple, Canon, Intel, NextPage, Novell, Pioneer, Statoil ASA, Toshiba and The United States Library of Congress.

Ecma International approved Office Open XML as Ecma standard (Ecma-376) on 2006-12-07 and submitted the approved submission for fasttracking standardization to ISO/IEC JTC 1.

The Ecma-376 Office Open XML File Formats standard can be freely downloaded from Ecma international.

Submission to ISO

As an International Organization for Standardization (ISO) external Category A liaison, Ecma have submitted Ecma 376 to the ISO Fast Track process, the same process available to National Standard Organizations. To meet the requirements of this process, Ecma have submitted the documents "Explanatory report on Office Open XML Standard (Ecma-376) submitted to JTC 1 for fast-track" and "Licensing conditions that Microsoft offers for Office Open XML".

The fast-tracking process consists of a contradictions phase, a ballot phase, and a ballot resolution phase.

During the contradictions phase, ISO members represented by their national standardization bodies can send in perceived contradictions, and during the ballot phase the members can vote on the specification as it was submitted by Ecma and send in editorial and technical comments along with their vote.

At the end of the ballot phase, all technical comments are consolidated and redistributed so that the voting nations may form a view on them in their totality. The SC34 secretariat then may decide to arrange for a special ballot resolution meeting (BRM) in which edits to the submitted standard can be adopted and the ISO members can vote on the submitted standard with the approved edits applied to them.

Ballot result

ISO announced in September 2007 that the submitted draft of Office Open XML has not achieved the required number of votes for approval during the ballot phase period. 87 ISO member countries responded to the ballot. There were 51 votes of "approval", 18 votes of "disapproval" and 18 abstentions. "P-members", who were required to vote, must approve by 66.67% for the text to be approved. The P-members voted 17 in favor out of 32, below the required threshold for approval. Also, no more than 25% of the total member votes may be negative for the text to be approved and this requirement was not met since 26% of the total votes were negative. The standardization process now moves to ballot resolution, as outlined below.

The summary of voting and National Body comments are available from the SC34 web site.

Response to the ballot

Now that the five-month letter ballot has closed, Ecma will respond to the comments made by the national bodies that voted. They may combine, de-duplicate, label and group the comments and then attempt to liaise informally with national bodies, to try and arrive at a set of revisions that are acceptable.

The result of Ecma's activity will be a "Disposition of Comments" document — effectively a set of proposed revisions to the DIS 29500 text designed to be acceptable to all the national bodies who disapproved of the text in the letter ballot. It is this series of edits which effectively form the agenda for the subsequent Ballot Resolution Meeting, and on which the attendees of that meeting will be asked to form opinions.

Ballot resolution process

Without unanimous support, or overwhelming disapproval of DIS 29500, there will be a Ballot Resolution Meeting (BRM), in which comments submitted with ballot votes can be resolved. The BRM will have been called at the discretion of the SC34 secretariat at the end of the five-month ballot voting. The outcome of this meeting effectively decides whether DIS 29500 succeeds or fails in its bid to become a full International Standard. The DIS 29500 BRM is scheduled for the week of 25 February-29 February, 2008 at the International Conference Centre Geneva. The convenor of the BRM has his own blog about this process.

Who attends the BRM?

The eligible participants in the BRM are representatives of the 87 national bodies that voted in the five-month ballot, the proposer (Ecma), and support and administrative staff. Observers and press are prohibited from attending, and the meeting may not be recorded. The JTC 1 Directives state that those national bodies that voted "disapprove" during the five-month ballot have a duty to send a delegation to this meeting. (JTC 1 Directives clause 13.7); those who voted "approve" or who abstained in the five-month ballot are under no such obligation.

The meeting is expected to attract between 40 and 140 participants, and because of the great interest, countries may have to limit the sizes of their delegations.

Meeting process

During this meeting, the participants consider each of Ecma's responses to the comments gathered in the preceding process. Each comment is thus effectively "resolved" by the meeting's participants either:

• agreeing to a proposed alteration of the text by Ecma
• agreeing to withdraw that comment (if, for example, it is incorrect)
• otherwise agreeing to amend the text or ignore a comment following discussion

In this way, a set of editorial changes to the text is agreed that, collectively, implies a new revised document. The meeting then agrees whether this final "implied" document is acceptable as a revision of DIS 29500.

Voting procedures

JTC 1 states that decisions at the BRM should be reached preferably by consensus, but that any unavoidable votes should be taken according to normal JTC 1 procedures (JTC 1 Directives clause 13.8).

The votes on resolving comments pass if:

• At least two-thirds of the P-members voting (abstentions do not count) shall have approved. The P-members form a subset of 40 countries with more voting power.
• Not more than one-quarter of the total number of votes cast (P-members and others) are negative

In the light of this resolution process, countries may change their position (as already expressed in the five-month ballot) to any of "approve", "disapprove" or "abstain" at the end of the BRM.

Final outcome

If this meeting fails to produce a text which the countries can approve with the required majority, the fast tracking of DIS 29500 fails and the procedure is immediately terminated (JTC 1 Directives clause 13.10): if the meeting does produce such text, and the voting criteria are thus met, any required changes are applied by the editor and the new text is passed for publication as a full ISO standard (JTC 1 Directives clause 13.9). The final revised text must then be distributed no later than one month after the end of the meeting (JTC 1 Directives clause 13.12).

After that, the text goes into the publication process which takes several months. It may take additional time for ISO to make the standard a free publication. Ecma International however, may immediately adopt the final text as a new version of Ecma-376 and publish it as such for free.

ISO maintenance regime

The precise details of a maintenance regime for OOXML (should it become an ISO Standard) are yet to be determined. Ecma have however put forward a maintenance proposal for discussion by SC34 at a meeting scheduled to take place in December 2007 in Kyoto.

Whatever is decided there, the JTC 1 Directives stipulate that:

• Proposals to amend the text, and acceptance of any such amendments, are subject to normal ISO voting processes (JTC 1 Directives clause 15.5)
• The standard cannot be 'stabilised' (i.e. no longer subject to periodic maintenance) except through approval in a JTC 1 ballot (JTC 1 Directives clause 15.6.2).
• For the standard to be stabilised it must have passed through 'one review cycle' (JTC 1 Directives clause 15.6.1). In this review cycle the text would have to have been re-written to comply with ISO's formatting and verbal requirements (JTC 1 Directives clause 13.4).

Complaints About National Bodies Process

Some complaints about the procedures in the national bodies have surfaced during the 5-month ballot process.

• At Portugal's national bodies TC meeting, it was suggested that Sun Microsystems be represented. An unofficial transcript suggested that this was refused for "lack of space". This has been criticized by opponents of OOXML , while Microsoft claims that the number of seats (not chairs) on the committee was limited to 20 by the national body before the meeting.
• The Swedish Standards Institute has become one of the battlegrounds for supporters and opponents of Office Open XML in the current ISO standardization process. Microsoft Sweden asked its partners to get involved in the standardization process. In total 22 Microsoft partners (4 of which may have been IBM partners as well) and Google paid a 17.000 SEK (2444 USD) fee to join the committee and were allowed to vote at the last minute. A Microsoft memo to its partners has surfaced, requesting them to join the SIS committee and vote in favor of OOXML in return for "marketing contributions". Microsoft claims the memo was the action of an individual employee acting outside company policy, and retracted soon as it was discovered. In the end, SIS decided to invalidate the vote as one company cast more than one vote, which is against SIS rules.
• In Netherlands, the committee of the Dutch standardization institute NEN intended to vote "No with comments", where the comments would list the conditions under which OOXML would be acceptable to the committee. These conditions were a compromise between the parties represented in the committee. However, the procedure required unanimous support of the "no" vote, and the lack of support by the Dutch Microsoft representation in the committee resulted in an "abstain" vote.
• In Switzerland, SNV registered a vote of approval with comments, there was criticism about a conflict of interest regarding the chairman of the NK 149 committee, who overruled votes and did not allow discussion of legal and economic arguments.
• Malaysia, which voted to abstain, the Industry Standards Committee on Information Technology, Telecommunication and Multimedia (ISC-G) voted overwhelmingly No, with comments.
• Cyprus, which was accepted as a P-member a few days before voting, did not follow a responsible process in analyzing OOXML.
• In Norway Microsoft sent a form letter to its partners asking them to submit it; 37 identical letters were received, but in some instances the form hadn't even been signed..

Adoption

Office Open XML is the default Microsoft Office 2007 format. For older versions such as Microsoft Office 2000, XP and 2003 a compatibility pack is provided. The compatibility pack can also be used as a stand alone converter with Microsoft Office 97.

• Microsoft Office Open XML File Format Converter for Mac 0.2 (Beta)Microsoft had previously advised users of Office 2007 to save their files in the old Office binary format.
• Beta testing has started on Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac, which will support the format. The final version is scheduled to release in the mid-January 2008.

• Apple Inc's iWork '08 suite has read only support for Office Open XML word processing, spreadsheet and presentation file formats in Pages, Numbers and Keynote (respectively).

• Apple Inc.'s TextEdit will support Office Open XML in the next version of OS X, Leopard.

• Apple Inc.'s iPhone has read only support for Office Open XML attachments in emails

• Corel has announced that by mid-2007 its WordPerfect Office suite will support Office Open XML as well as OpenDocument.

• Gnumeric has limited SpreadsheetML markup language support.

• Novell has created an Office Open XML plugin for the Novell edition of OpenOffice.org. An Office Open XML import filter is slated for inclusion in version 2.4 of the OpenOffice.org project.

• docXConverter by Panergy Ltd. converts from WordprocessingML to Rich Text Format (RTF). DocXConverter can be used to transfer WordprocessingML data to other applications that read RTF data such as Word 97.

• Dataviz' DocumentsToGo for PalmOS supports Office Open XML documents.

• Datawatch supports Office Open XML spreadsheets in its report mining tool Monarch v9.0

Arguments in support and criticism of OOXML standard

Support

Organizations and individuals supporting Office Open XML have provided arguments for standardization, summarized by ECMA.

User base argument

The most widely used office productivity packages currently rely on various proprietary and reverse engineered binary file formats such as doc, ppt and xls. For users of the binary formats there could be an advantage to migrating to an open XML standard that maps the features of previous binary file formats. Office Open XML for this purpose explicitly states as a goal of the format to preserve investments in existing files and applications.

Microsoft Key benefits arguments

Microsoft provided an overview of benefits in using Office Open XML

• Integration of business information with documents
• Open and royalty-free specification
• Compact, robust file format
• Safer documents
• Easier integration
• Transparency and improved information security
• Compatibility

Policy arguments

The neutrality of this section is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Ecma has provided the following policy arguments in favor of standardization with respect to Overlap in Scope with ISO/IEC 26300:2006 (ODF): overlap in scope of ISO/IEC standards is common and can serve a practical purpose; OOXML addresses distinct user requirements; ODF and OOXML are structured to meet different user requirements; OOXML and ODF can serve as duo-standards.

In a statement on February 14, 2007 Microsoft attacked IBM's "global campaign" in opposition to the Office Open XML standardization process. In it, they claim that:

• "Ecma almost unanimously agreed to submit Open XML as a standard for ratification by ISO/IEC JTC1 with only IBM dissenting."
• "IBM led a global campaign urging national bodies to ... not even consider Open XML, because ODF had made it through ISO/IEC JTC1 first – in other words, that Open XML should not even be considered on its technical merits because a competing standard had already been adopted. This campaign to stop even the consideration of Open XML in ISO/IEC JTC1 is a blatant attempt to use the standards process to limit choice in the marketplace for ulterior commercial motives – and without regard for the negative impact on consumer choice and technological innovation."

Technical arguments

• The use of the Open Packaging specification which allows for Indirection, Chunking and Relative indirection.
• Uses the ZIP format, making ZIP part of the standard (Due to compression, files are smaller than current binary formats )
• It supports custom data elements for integration of data specific to an application or an organisation that wants to use the format.
• It is currently the only open document standard to define spreadsheet formulae.
• Office Open XML contains alternate representations for the XML schemas and extensibility mechanisms using RELAX NG (ISO/IEC 19757-2) and NVDL (ISO/IEC 19757-4)
• No restriction to image, audio or video types. Images can be in Microsoft WMF, GIF, PNG, TIFF, PICT, JPEG or any other image type, Book 1 §14.2.12.
• Embedded controls can be of any type, such as Java or ActiveX, Book 1 §15.2.8.
• WordprocessingML font specifications can include font metrics and PANOSE information to assist in finding a substitution font if the original is not available, Book 3 §2.10.5.
• Alternate Content Block, a solution to define alternate content (like an image) which can be used in various situations where a consuming application might not be capable of interpreting what a producing application wrote, Book 3 §2.18.4.
• Internationalization support. For example date representation: In WordprocessingML (Book 4 §2.18.7) and SpreadsheetML (Book 4 §3.18.5), calendar dates can be written using Gregorian (three variants), Hebrew, Hijri, Japanese (Emperor Era), Korean (Tangun Era), Saka, Taiwanese, and Thai formats and for example several internationalization related spreadsheet conversion functions.
• Custom XML schema extensibility allowing implementations to the format with features. That can for instance facilitate conversion from other formats and future features that are not part of the official specification yet.

Criticism

The standard has been the subject of wide and varied debate in the software industry. Many of the participants in the approval process are generally supportive of eventual ISO standardization, but are unwilling to support the ISO fast track process until their issues are resolved. Over 6000 pages long, the specification is difficult to quickly evaluate. The existence of the OpenDocument format (ISO 26300:6000) raised the issue that there is overlap with this standard. Critics suggest Microsoft adopt the OpenDocument standard as its default format for future versions of Office . Objectors also complain that there could be user confusion regarding the two standards because of the similarity of the "Office Open XML" name to both "OpenDocument" and "OpenOffice".
Microsoft, whose products use the current version of Office Open XML has not committed to use the OOXML specification for any length of time. This a concern for organizations with lots of documents that need to be accessed for decades. Brian Jones, the Microsoft manager working on OOXML in his blog stated "if Ecma takes the development in a completly different direction even though it does not expect that to happen as the rest of Ecma committee members appear to have similar visions on the future of the Office Open XML specification." but that "Since it’s not guaranteed, it would be hard for us to make any sort of official statement.”

Criticism by competitors and free software and open source

Critics include a wide variety of organizations and individuals, including the free software and open source communities, OpenDocument supporters and major industry players, such as Sun Microsystems, IBM and Google.

OOXML has been widely criticized on technical and legal grounds, and the standardization process itself has also been questioned. In addition to the specific issues noted below, an overall premise of their argument is that the format is inherently closed in many respects and thus a poor candidate for a global standard.. Similar concerns are raised by Preliminary Google reply to DIS 29500 : the consideration of ECMA-376 OOXML for ISO standardization] and IBM Comments on INCITS LB 2212 - DIS 29500.

There is also criticism that the proposed standard duplicates, overlaps with, and is unable to be merged with the existing ISO OpenDocument Format.

Legal uncertainty

• Scope of the Patent Licensing does cover only required features of the standard. Specifically Microsoft's Covenant not to sue grants patent use "that are necessary to implement only the required portions of the Covered Specification that are described in detail and not merely referenced in such Specification." Also Microsoft's Open Specification Promise only protects what is explicitly specified in the standard.
• The Open Specification Promise is not available in languages other than English and tied to an Anglo-Saxon legal system. It is untested in court.

Technical criticisms

• Reliance on application-defined behaviors to support important functionality that should be documented or supported via existing standards. Book 4 §6.1.2.19 defines the "equationxml" attribute of "shape" elements, "used to rehydrate an equation using the Office Open XML Math syntax"; however, the "actual format of the contents of this attribute are application-defined".
• Locale conventions (such as decimal points, date formats, and character settings) are inconsistent. SpreadsheetML documents are internally represented in the US English locale, but font types such as "bold" can be specified in any language (e.g. "gras" in French), even though the specification does not provide a list of equivalents in different languages.
• Non-standard language codes and color names.
• SpreadsheetML stores dates in decimal time as the number of fractional days since 1900. It incorrectly treats 1900 as a leap year in order to remain backward compatible with previous versions of Microsoft Excel and Lotus 1-2-3. The criticism is twofold; only dates after the nonexistent Gregorian date 1900-02-29 can be used, and it ignores the ISO 8601 standard for the representation of time and date.
• Use of DrawingML and VML instead of SVG, and use of Office Math ML instead of MathML. MathML and SVG are W3C recommendations. VML was submitted as a W3C standard in 1997 but got rejected.
• Internal inconsistencies and omissions. Book 4 §2.18.4 lists styles such as "apples", "scaredCat", and "heebieJeebies", but does not fully define these styles. Missing properties include height, width, color depth, and orientation.
• Inconsistent notations for percentage units. Book 4 §2.18.85 uses predefined symbols (like "pct15" for 15%) in 5 or 2.5 percent increments, §2.15.1.95 uses a decimal number giving the percentage, §2.18.97 uses a number in fiftieths of a percent, and §5.1.12.41 uses a number in thousandths of a percent.
• Inflexible numbering format. Book 4 §2.18.66 describes a numbering format that is fixed to a few countries and contradicts both the W3C XSLT recommendation and Unicode ISO 10646 standard.
• Non-standard, inflexible paper size naming. Book 4 §3.3.1.61 define a "paperSize" attribute for which values 1 through 68 are predefined standard paper sizes such as A4 paper.
• Non-extensible bitmasks, some elements attributes are defined as bitmasks. Book 4 §2.8.2.16 "sig (Supported Unicode Subranges and Code Pages)" describes the <w:sig> element, the attributes of which are all bitmasks. The bitmask actually represent values in ISO standards IS 9541-4 or 14496-22
• Legacy document rendering compatibility is identified using (deprecated) tags. Book 4 §2.15.3.6, "autoSpaceLikeWord95", “useWord97LineBreakRules”, “useWord2002TableStyleRules", and §2.15.3.31, "lineWrapLikeWord6", and "suppressTopSpacingWP" for a 16-year-old version of WordPerfect. These items should only occur in OOXML documents that were converted from predecessor Microsoft Office documents.
• Accessibility issues according to University of Toronto, such as form fields not being associated with their labels, absence of a tabbing order for forms, and limitations in the use of alternative text descriptions of objects.
• SpreadsheetML has an optional internal dependency, which require changes in multiple parts of the XML package for cell updates, with multiple ways to represent semantically identical cell data.. Although this criticism is considered more in regards to Office 2007’s implementation

Editorial criticisms

• More than 10% of the examples used in the WordProcessingML part of the specification (300 of 2300) do not validate against the schema, indicating that the examples in specification have not been reviewed enough prior to becoming an Ecma standard
• Errors in the spreadsheet formula specifications confirmed by Microsoft.

References

1. ^ "Ecma International approves Office Open XML standard" (Press release). Ecma International. December 7 2006. Retrieved 2006-12-08. {{cite press release}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
2. "How to extract information from Office files by using Office file formats and schemas". Microsoft. 2007-03-27. Retrieved 2007-07-10.
3. Brian Jones (2007-01-25). "History of office XML formats (1998-2006)". {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |Publisher= ignored (|publisher= suggested) (help)
4. Telematics between Administrations Committee based on IDA expert group on open document formats (2004-05-25). "TAC approval on conclusions and recommendations on open document formats". IDABC - European eGovernment Services. Retrieved 2007-07-30.
5. George Ou (2007-04-27). "MS Office 2007 versus Open Office 2.2 shootout". ZDnet.com. Retrieved 2007-04-27.
6. Murray Sargent (2007-06-05). "Science and Nature have difficulties with Word 2007 mathematics". MSDN blogs. Retrieved 2007-07-31.
7. David Carlisle (2007-05-09). "XHTML and MathML from Office 2007". David Carlisle. Retrieved 2007-09-20.
8. Wouter Van Vugt (2007-08-13). "Open XML Explained e-book". Openxmldeveloper.org. Retrieved 2007-09-14.
9. Tom Ngo (December 11 2006). "Office Open XML Overview" (PDF). Ecma International. p. 6. Retrieved 2007-01-23. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
10. "What is Ecma International". {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |Publisher= ignored (|publisher= suggested) (help)
11. "Microsoft Covenant Regarding Office 2003 XML Reference Schemas". Microsoft. Retrieved 2006-07-11.
12. "2 Escape Hatches in MS's Covenant Not to Sue". Groklaw. Retrieved 2007-01-29.
13. Berlind, David (November 28 2005). "Top open source lawyer blesses new terms on Microsoft's XML file format". ZDNet. Retrieved 2007-01-27. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
14. "Microsoft Open Specification Promise". Microsoft. 2006-09-12. Retrieved 2007-04-22. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)
15. Baker & McKenzie (2006). "Standardization and Licensing of Microsoft's Office Open XML Reference Schema" (PDF). Baker & Mckenzie. Retrieved 2007-02-01. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
16. ^ Licensing conditions that Microsoft offers for Office Open XML
17. -Response Document- National Body Comments from 30-Day Review of the Fast Track Ballot for ISO/IEC DIS 29500 (ECMA-376) Office Open XML File Formats
18. IDABC - European eGovernment Services (2004). "European Interoperability Framework for pan-European eGovernment Services". Retrieved 2007-07-30.
19. "The new open standard safeguards the continued use of billions of existing documents". Ecma International. Retrieved 2007-01-28.
20. "TC45 - Office Open XML Formats". Ecma International. Retrieved 2007-02-08.
21. ^ "ISO/IEC JTC 1 Directives, 5th Edition, Version 2.0". iso. Retrieved 2007-01-28.
22. Explanatory report on Office Open XML Standard (Ecma-376) submitted to JTC 1 for fast-track
23. "Vote closes on draft ISO/IEC DIS 29500 standard" (Press release). International Organization for Standardization. September 4 2007. Retrieved 2007-09-04. {{cite press release}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
24. JTC 1 P-Members
25. Alex Brown (BRM convenor) (2007-09-06). "OOXML - what just happened?".
26. "CT-173 meeting of 2007-07-16 By Rui Seabra". {{cite web}}: Text "author Rui Seabra (ANSOL - FSF europe)" ignored (help)
27. Pamela Jones. "Notes from Portugal on the July 16 meeting on ECMA-376".
28. Jason Matusow (Microsoft senior director of intellectual property) (2007-07-31). "Ecma Open XML and the Portuguese National Body". MSN blogs.
29. "Microsoft buys the Swedish vote on OOXML".
30. "Microsoft pressed partners in Sweden to vote for OOXML".
31. "Open XML - The Vote in Sweden".
32. Kim Haverblad (2007-08-30). "The Swedish OOXML vote has been declared invalid!". {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |Publisher= ignored (|publisher= suggested) (help)
33. ISOC.nl regrets absence of Netherlands decision on OOXML. Internet Society Netherlands press release, 17 August 2007.
34. FSFE formal objection to the UK14 meeting. Free Software Foundation Europe. 2007-08-13.
35. Appeal to the decision by Swiss Internet User Group. 14 August 2007.
36. Yusseri Yusoff (2007-09-04). "OOXML is not (yet) an ISO standard, as Malaysia votes "No" ... or did we?". {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |Publisher= ignored (|publisher= suggested) (help)
37. kgi (2007-09-04). "Cyprus votes Yes". {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |Publisher= ignored (|publisher= suggested) (help)
38. IDG: Microsoft planterade påtryckningar i Norge
39. BetaNews: Evidence of Microsoft Influencing OOXML Votes in Nordic States
40. Digi.no: Presset med brev-kampanje i OOXML-strid
41. "Microsoft Office Compatibility Pack for Word, Excel, and PowerPoint 2007 File Formats (Version 3)". Microsoft. 2007-06-18. Retrieved 2007-09-04.
42. "Microsoft Office Open XML File Format Converter for Mac 0.2 (Beta)". Microsoft. July 31 2007. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
43. sherjo (2006-12-6). "Converters Coming! Free and (Fairly) Fast". The Office for Mac Team Blog. Retrieved 2007-03-18. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
44. Forbes (August 2, 2007). "Microsoft Delays Office for Mac Release".
45. "Apple - iWork - Pages". Retrieved 2007-07-08.
46. "Apple - iWork - Numbers". Retrieved 2007-07-08.
47. "Apple - iWork - Keynote". Retrieved 2007-07-08.
48. "OS X leopard Text Edit to Support Office 2007?". uneasysilence. Retrieved 2007-02-14.
49. ""iPhone User's Guide"" (PDF). Apple, Inc.
50. "Corel WordPerfect Office To Support Open Document Format and Microsoft Office Open XML". corel. Retrieved 2007-01-30.
51. "GNOME Office / Gnumeric". GNOME.org. Retrieved 2006-07-28.
52. "Download OpenOffice.org–OpenXML translator". Novell. Retrieved 2007-03-02.
53. "Issue 79123 - Integrate a first version of the import filter for ooxml wordprocessing documents". OpenOffice.org. Retrieved 2007-07-09.
54. "docXConverter - Features". panergy. Retrieved 2007-01-31.
55. ""DocumentsToGo for PalmOS Premium Edition"". Dataviz.
56. "Datawatch Announces Availability of Monarch V.9.0; Supports Microsoft® Windows Vista™ and Extends Excel Capabilities". 2007-02-27. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |Author= ignored (|author= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |Publisher= ignored (|publisher= suggested) (help)
57. Open XML community. "Hear what Ecma has to say about Open XML (paragraph: Key benefits of Open XML)". OpenXMLcommunity.org.
59. "Ecma Office Open XML File Formats overview".
60. -Response Document- National Body Comments from 30-Day Review of the Fast Track Ballot for ISO/IEC DIS 29500 (ECMA-376) Office Open XML File Formats
61. Interoperability, Choice and Open XML
62. Rick Jeliffe (2007-07-29). "(comment on) Can a file be ODF and Open XML at the same time ?". O'Reilly XML.com. Retrieved 2007-08-06.
63. ^ Cite error: The named reference ecma_tc45_white paper was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
64. "Six thousand pages, one month, no chance..." Retrieved 2007-02-03.
65. ^ "EOOXML objections". grokdoc. Retrieved 2007-01-02.
66. "Microsoft won't commit to the open document standard it's pushing so hard".
67. ODF Alliance. "Office Open XML factsheet" (PDF). Retrieved 2007. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
68. Sam Hiser (June 14 2007). "Achieving Openness: A Closer Look at ODF and OOXML" (HTML). ONLamp.com. p. 1. Retrieved 2007-07-12. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
69. Achieving Openness: A Closer Look at ODF and OOXML
70. ^ Stéphane Rodriguez (August 28, 2007). "OOXML is defective by design".
71. Spolsky, Joel (2006-06-16). "My First BillG Review". Joel on Software. Retrieved 2007-01-31. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)
72. "DIS9500 comments Autralia-13".
73. Stephen A. Hockema, Jutta Treviranus (2007-08-07). "Accessibility Issues with Office Open XML". University of Toronto.
74. Miquel de Icaza. "Except he doesnt".
75. "WordprocessingML Reference Material". ooxml-wiki. British Standards Institution. Retrieved 2007-09-15.
76. Brian Jones. "Spreadsheet formula bugs". MSDN blogs.

See also

• List of document markup languages
• Comparison of document markup languages
• Microsoft Office 2003 XML formats

External links

This article's use of external links may not follow Misplaced Pages's policies or guidelines. Please improve this article by removing excessive or inappropriate external links, and converting useful links where appropriate into footnote references. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

General Office Open XML

• OpenXMLDeveloper.org, Microsoft's site for developers
• Open XML Community site Microsoft's site for customers and partners
• Template:PDFlink
• Questions on Open XML , Wouter van de Vlugt

Converters and tools

• A OOXML package explorer that allows you to edit XML parts and validate parts against the Ecma schemas created by Info Support's Wouter van Vugt.
• A set of PHP classes to create Office 2007 SpreadsheetML markup language documents developed by Maarten Balliauw.
• ExcelPackage, Open source, server-side creation of Excel 2007 files (SpreadsheetML)
• opensource Office Open XML to ODF translator add-in for Microsoft Office XP, 2003 and 2007
• docx2doc Convert from docx to doc online (non-free conversion)
• Open XML Writer OpenXML Writer is an opensource text editor for creating Office Open XML Wordprocessing files (.docx)
• docXConverter by Panergy Shareware to convert docx files on Mac and Windows
• GemBox.Spreadsheet .NET component for reading/writing XLSX, CSV or XLS files. Free version is limited to 150 rows, source code for OpenXML available for purchase.

• XML-based standards
• Markup languages
• Open formats
• Computer file formats
• Microsoft Office
• Markup language comparisons