Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Hello Charles (et al),

2011/1/3 Charles-H. Schulz <>:

Le Mon, 03 Jan 2011 10:55:21 -0600,
Barbara Duprey <> a écrit :

On 1/3/2011 3:06 AM, Davide Dozza wrote:
Il 02/01/2011 20:41, Charles-H. Schulz ha scritto:

Well, the problem is that it's not that documented. Really,
Transitional OOXML was an honourable way out for MS at the ISO's JTC 1.

Basically the deal was that the strict OOXML was rumoured to be clean
(although I don't think it is and I'm not the only one) while the
transitional was "offering more features" and was more in line with the
existing and used formats used by MS Office 2007 and 2010. At this
stage we have no evidence that the transitional OOXML and the formats
used in MS office suites match, and I'm not even saying this out of bad
will against MS: it's a really important question.

As one of those actually trying to maintain OOXML in ISO, your
discussions are really interesting to me.

As per your discussions around S vs T, there are a couple of points
I'd like to make.

1. About conformance to OOXML (S or T): Leif mentioned that
implementing OOXML would display Microsoft's dirty laundry. I am
looking very much forward to your findings and where Microsoft Office
does not comply with the conformance rules in OOXML. I hope you will
share these with us - and the world in general, and any test documents
generated by Microsoft Office you make during your implementation
would be extremely interesting to look at.

2. T vs S: Please bear in mind that S is basically a limited version
of T. The only major obstacle/difference is that alle the namespaces
of S are different than those of T. Also, Microsoft Office uses these
namespaces during import as some sort of white-list, and AFAIK the new
namespaces of S have not yet been added to this whitelist (since the
addition of them is relatively recent and was after launch of
Microsoft Office 2010). Basically, if Microsoft Office doesn't
recognize the new namespaces, the docs will all fail on import in
Microsoft Office and you'd have zero interop.

Finally I ancourage you to make a public place to put your findings
while implementing OOXML in LibreOffice. It could serve as a very
usefull reference for a lot of people - including people like Leif
lobbying our politicians to use/mandate usage ODF.

PS: when trying to do interop with e.g. Microsoft Office always
consult their implementer notes available at

If any of you need additional information, I'd be happy to help.

PPS: for those of you on this list actually implementing OOXML in
LibreOffice - are you considering implementing MCE (OOXML, Part 3)
fully in LibreOffice?

Jesper Lund Stocholm

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.