Open XML : How To Create a Proprietary Standard
Update: 1/6/07 Slashdot has promoted a Rob Weir article denouncing the Open XML specification. Weir says it's complicated enough to be a DNA sequence. He's equally insightful and funny.
A recent editorial of Software Development Times addresses Microsoft's unique document “standard” -- Open XML. They call in to question whether anyone other than Microsoft can maintain compliance to the list of specifications presented in the ECMA approved, 6,000 page tome. I think “disingenuous” would be a more accurate summary.
The fact that Office Open XML is huge—the specification document is 6,039 pages long—didn’t deter Ecma, which is a vendor consortium, not a disinterested standards body. The near impossibility that another software company might be able to create a 100 percent-compliant implementation of Office Open XML didn’t deter them, either.
So now, thanks to Ecma, Microsoft will be able to compete for government business, saying that because Office 2007 is standards-compliant, its documents meet all the requirements of the new regulations. Because Microsoft can leverage its Office monopoly, the software giant wins, and everyone else loses.
Unfortunately, most of the trade press sees Open XML for something else, as a best-effort on Microsoft's part to embrace openness. As if open standards for document retention followed the same Web 2.0 trends as does AJAX and Web Services. There are newness and coolness factors to have “open” and “xml” defined in the document archival format. Too bad it's as significant for compliance as POSIX was with Microsoft's NT4. With POSIX included in NT4, Microsoft was better situated to introduce its new server technology into a traditional IT infrastructure which had rigid compliance requirements.
Open XML is no match to OpenDocument (ODF), but the confusion in terms and usage will help Microsoft maintain its dominance for the next generation of office documents. I'm heartened that Software Development Times can read the fine print, I just wish more analysts and trade journalists could be as open.
- 
