http://ifacethoughts.net/2006/12/05/open-xml-and-open-document/ Thoughts on software development and related, by Abhijit Nadgouda Sat, 13 Mar 2010 23:32:32 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 http://ifacethoughts.net/2006/12/05/open-xml-and-open-document/comment-page-1/#comment-83640 ODF Icons | iface thoughts Wed, 01 Aug 2007 12:41:26 +0000 http://ifacethoughts.net/2006/12/05/open-xml-and-open-document/#comment-83640 [...] Fletcher gives his choice for ODF icons. There are more examples from which you can choose. I support ODF because it is the open standard that focused on interoperability and freedom from tools and [...] [...] Fletcher gives his choice for ODF icons. There are more examples from which you can choose. I support ODF because it is the open standard that focused on interoperability and freedom from tools and [...]

]]> http://ifacethoughts.net/2006/12/05/open-xml-and-open-document/comment-page-1/#comment-9293 Translating From OpenXML To ODF on iface thoughts Fri, 02 Feb 2007 12:11:25 +0000 http://ifacethoughts.net/2006/12/05/open-xml-and-open-document/#comment-9293 [...] for translating documents from Open XML to ODF formats. This was one of the things that had come up when Open XML was standardized. The OpenXML Translator, which is an add-in for Microsoft Word 2007, will provide options for [...] [...] for translating documents from Open XML to ODF formats. This was one of the things that had come up when Open XML was standardized. The OpenXML Translator, which is an add-in for Microsoft Word 2007, will provide options for [...]

]]> http://ifacethoughts.net/2006/12/05/open-xml-and-open-document/comment-page-1/#comment-2426 Double Standards! on iface thoughts Fri, 08 Dec 2006 09:46:48 +0000 http://ifacethoughts.net/2006/12/05/open-xml-and-open-document/#comment-2426 [...] There does not seem to be much opposition to existence of two standards for the same purpose. Only IBM did. Frankly, I see Microsoft coming up with Open XML because a lot of bodies, including government agencies, were switching to the ODF. Is there an answer to the question why Microsoft did not adopt ODF, or develop it further if it was found lacking? So yeah, now I can claim to comply to an open standard but still cannot guarantee interoperability, because someone else might comply to the other open standard! Is there any thought being given to the benefit to the end user out of these certifications? Or standards just for the sake of standards or for the sake of businesses? Either we need to answer these questions or start living with double standards! [...] [...] There does not seem to be much opposition to existence of two standards for the same purpose. Only IBM did. Frankly, I see Microsoft coming up with Open XML because a lot of bodies, including government agencies, were switching to the ODF. Is there an answer to the question why Microsoft did not adopt ODF, or develop it further if it was found lacking? So yeah, now I can claim to comply to an open standard but still cannot guarantee interoperability, because someone else might comply to the other open standard! Is there any thought being given to the benefit to the end user out of these certifications? Or standards just for the sake of standards or for the sake of businesses? Either we need to answer these questions or start living with double standards! [...]

]]>