Re: [tdf-discuss] OOXML ECMA-376, transitionnal and strict

At my organisation the email system makes a copy of every email with an 
editable document attached (odf, ooxml and others)  that is sent or 
received.  It copies them into another email account for a simply way to 
get a feel of what's going in-out.  I too would also like to know if 
there is a tool to parse attachments to determine whether their format 
is strict or transitional.

On 28/04/16 7:15 PM, mjollnir66@laposte.net wrote:
> Thank you very much for those informations.
> I did not succeed in getting them anywhere but here.
> They are going to be very useful (i'll translate them on the french discuss forum too)
>
> One last thing about this matter of OOXML.
>
> No average user is going to know (nor to care) about which OOXML version he is using.
> And, 99,99% of the time, it's going to be transitionnal OOXML.
> Which is un-recommended by law now, and which has to change whithin 3 years max.
>
> The question is, how do we enforce the rules with the greatest efficiency possible.
>
> In my opinion, an automatic reply of the administration ingoing email platform would be the best 
> solution.
> It would reply automatically to anyone who sends an email with a transitionnal OOXML attached.
> This email would be written very carefully whith information about IGR v2, about the 2 versions of 
> OOXML and about what are the best practices to communicate with a french administration (ODF).
>
> I'm not sure if it can be done technically, but I'm going to know it soon. If anyone has a better 
> idea, please don't hesitate to tell.
>
> Therefore is the following question :
> What is the easiest way to know wether a file is written in strict OOXML or not ?
>
> Surely we will have to unzip and check something in the OOXML file.
>
> Any way to do it without the need of unzipping it ?
> (check file property or check file header)
>
> If not, is there a single file in which we could check a tag for every kind of OOXML file (docx, 
> pptx, xlsx..) ?
> (Unzip. Open xxx.xml. Find <yyy> tag. If value NEQ [xmlstrict] then send email to sender )
>
> Or would we be obliged to have a different method for every kind of OOXML files.
> (Unzip. In case of filename ends with docx Open xxx.xml. Find <yyy> tag. If value NEQ [xmlstrict] 
> then send email to sender. In case of filename ends with xlsx [...] )
>
> Or maybe just checking if a single file exists or not would tell us if the file is strict or 
> transitionnal ?
>
>
>
> ----- Mail original -----
>
> De: "Italo Vignoli" <italo@libreoffice.org>
> À: discuss@documentfoundation.org
> Envoyé: Mercredi 27 Avril 2016 19:39:14
> Objet: Re: [tdf-discuss] OOXML ECMA-376, transitionnal and strict
>
> On 26/04/2016 12:46, mjollnir66@laposte.net wrote:
>
> > Is it correct to say that the Transitionnal OOXML format is not
> > compliant with any international standard or norm ? Neither ECMA, nor
> > ISO, nor anything but MS$ itself.
> OOXML Transitional is not the standard format, but a tweaked version of
> OOXML integrating bynary blobs and other non standard components, which
> was supposed to help the transition from the legacy file formats to
> OOXML Strict (which is the only standard file format).
>
> > If so, Does this means that NO version of MS$ office (from 2010 to
> > the actual) writes BY DEFAULT in a standardized or normalised format.
> > (cf.
> > https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc179191%28v=office.16%29.aspx
> > for default formats)
> Yes. Every Microsoft Office version since 2007 defaults to OOXML
> Transitional, implementing a slightly different version of the OOXML
> Transitional non standard file format.
>
> Only MS Office 2013 and MS Office 2016 implement OOXML Strict, with a
> process that makes it virtually impossible for any normal user to get a
> real OOXML Strict file format (the user should save the document using
> the OOXML Strict option - listed as last of the "save as" options -
> before writing a single character).
>
> Because of this behaviour which intentionally prevents the creation of
> OOXML Strict files, the number of OOXML Strict files available is close
> to zero.
>
> In addition, Microsoft fonts used as default by MS Office since 2007 -
> known as C-Fonts or Calibri, Cambria, Candara, Consolas, Constantia and
> Corbel) - can only be used by MS Office licensed customers, as they are
> included in MS Office EULA, to add another level of incompatibility.
>
> > Is anyone confident enough in his knowledge of OOXML to acknowledge
> > this ? Maybe this place is not the best one to ask the question ? If
> > so, would please somebody advice me the best place to post the
> > question ?
> I am confident enough to answer most questions about OOXML issues.
>
> Please do note that after the UK decision on July 22, 2014, not even
> Microsoft has dared to define OOXML as standard in public, because it is
> perfectly clear that the file format is not standard and will never be a
> standard (after nine years and four different implementations of OOXML
> Transitional, which was supposed to last a maximum of two MS Office
> versions).

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: discuss+unsubscribe@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted