Microsoft are arguing that their Office Open XML format is the best standard for preserving Legacy files, when the world already has an adopted standard, ISO/IEC XML 26300:2006 for storing, recalling, and transmitting documents, relied upon by industry already that has brought new economic giants to the $100 Laptop.

The Open Document Foundation argue this is both un-necessary, counter-productive, and will not enable Governments and other bodies responsible for safe storage and access to legacy files achieve this objective without being locked in.

An important point of any standard is the desirability and ease with which it can be implemented. A standard that cannot be implemented by all interested parties within the realm it applies to makes it virtually useless, and only serves to hinder interoperability rather than promote it.

This authoritatively referenced paper traces the histories of the publicly developed ISO XML 26300:2006 Standard with the hidden development of MSOOXML, and compares and comments on the coding of the two standards side by side.

An early conclusion is that the philosophy of ISO XML was towards ease of interoperability and implementation, whilst MSOOXML philosophy was to represent data used in the Microsoft office suit applications, reducing file sizes and increasing performance. The paper goes on to review significant contradictions found between the two formats and identifies reasons why merging the standards looks difficult.

Combining highly technical analyses with very clear stage by stage explanations of the impact of the differences, the paper discusses some well know issues that play into data preservation aspects such as date and time handling, representation of percentage values and vector graphics with a new clarity.

Download the paper today, and see why this proprietary standard should be excluded.

Download Today