You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org> on 2014/10/25 02:50:07 UTC
Re: OpenOffice lost again 6000 users (was: Improved OOXML support?)
<orcnote> below.
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Douglas Pitonyak [mailto:andrew@pitonyak.org]
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 17:27
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Spam (9.566):Re: OpenOffice lost again 6000 users (was: Improved OOXML support?)
On 10/24/2014 11:42 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> <orcnote> below.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Douglas Pitonyak [mailto:andrew@pitonyak.org]
> Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 06:18
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: OpenOffice lost again 6000 users (was: Improved OOXML support?)
>
>
[ ... ]
> I am not overly informed on this, but, I think that the primary
> complaint was that the OOXML ISO standard supports storing proprietary
> binary blobs that are not part of the standard as aprt of the document.
>
[ ... ]
More specifically, I was under the impression that you could include a
binary blob of say a doc file.
<orcnote>
More specifically, can you point me to an authoritative source
For this claim?
I don't want to take a search of the OOXML specification
without some specific details.
</orcnote>
--
Andrew Pitonyak
My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt
Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
RE: OpenOffice lost again 6000 users (was: Improved OOXML support?)
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
<below>
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Douglas Pitonyak [mailto:andrew@pitonyak.org]
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 22:26
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: OpenOffice lost again 6000 users (was: Improved OOXML support?)
Do you know off hand if this is through OLE or some other mechanism?
I have been handed a docx files with something embedded inside that
prevents viewing because I do not happen to have that particular
application installed on my computer.
<orcnote>
Without looking at the docx file, I have no idea. Usually OLE objects
still provide viewing without the OLE "host" application. An alternative
metafile rendition of the object's presentation is typically incorporated
in the DOCX (or DOC) just so that viewing is possible. The same thing is
done with ODF when OLE objects are used (at least by OpenOffice.org apps).
Are you attempting to view the document in Microsoft Office or in Apache
OpenOffice?
I see that I should have been more nuanced about "ridiculous practice."
I meant for malicious purposes. Of course, there are thoughtless practices
where uses expect that anything that works for them will work for recipients
of their document files. I recall folks who would email Microsoft Publisher
documents to lists of users with no idea that recipients could not read those
attachments. The rise of PDF has repaired that particular situation, but many
creators of DOCX files can fall into the same "works-for-me" pitfall. I
still get TIFF attachments from Macintosh users and it is a pain to arrange
to view them (not all of TIFFs many options being handled by all TIFF viewers).
Of course, if a document depends on installed extensions, we have the same
problems in interchange among Office users and OpenOffice users.
As you know, there are many more cases of naïve use that impede
collaboration via editable forms of documents. Simply having
styles used consistently is a problem for some meticulous document
creators.
What I find missing in the current document-interchange situation is the
availability of enforceable templates that deny the use of features not
provided for in a template-controlled profile. This would stamp out a
variety of evils, but there is a downside too, since it takes power
users to create them and fend of "why can't I ... ?" questions.
</orcnote>
On 10/25/2014 12:50 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> To be clear, I can put a complete Word Document (as a binary blob) inside of an ODF Text document too. I just don't know if that particular avenue is what was taken as a smoking gun about OOXML or not. I can put a complete ODF Text document (as a binary blob) inside of an OOXML .docx too.
>
> The fact that this is possible is no blemish on either of the ODF and OOXML specifications. It is not something anyone makes ridiculous practice of.
>
> - Dennis
--
Andrew Pitonyak
My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt
Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice lost again 6000 users (was: Improved OOXML support?)
Posted by Andrew Douglas Pitonyak <an...@pitonyak.org>.
Do you know off hand if this is through OLE or some other mechanism?
I have been handed a docx files with something embedded inside that
prevents viewing because I do not happen to have that particular
application installed on my computer.
On 10/25/2014 12:50 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> To be clear, I can put a complete Word Document (as a binary blob) inside of an ODF Text document too. I just don't know if that particular avenue is what was taken as a smoking gun about OOXML or not. I can put a complete ODF Text document (as a binary blob) inside of an OOXML .docx too.
>
> The fact that this is possible is no blemish on either of the ODF and OOXML specifications. It is not something anyone makes ridiculous practice of.
>
> - Dennis
--
Andrew Pitonyak
My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt
Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
RE: OpenOffice lost again 6000 users (was: Improved OOXML support?)
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
To be clear, I can put a complete Word Document (as a binary blob) inside of an ODF Text document too. I just don't know if that particular avenue is what was taken as a smoking gun about OOXML or not. I can put a complete ODF Text document (as a binary blob) inside of an OOXML .docx too.
The fact that this is possible is no blemish on either of the ODF and OOXML specifications. It is not something anyone makes ridiculous practice of.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamilton@acm.org]
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 17:50
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: OpenOffice lost again 6000 users (was: Improved OOXML support?)
<orcnote> below.
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Douglas Pitonyak [mailto:andrew@pitonyak.org]
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 17:27
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Spam (9.566):Re: OpenOffice lost again 6000 users (was: Improved OOXML support?)
On 10/24/2014 11:42 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> <orcnote> below.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Douglas Pitonyak [mailto:andrew@pitonyak.org]
> Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 06:18
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: OpenOffice lost again 6000 users (was: Improved OOXML support?)
>
>
[ ... ]
> I am not overly informed on this, but, I think that the primary
> complaint was that the OOXML ISO standard supports storing proprietary
> binary blobs that are not part of the standard as aprt of the document.
>
[ ... ]
More specifically, I was under the impression that you could include a
binary blob of say a doc file.
<orcnote>
More specifically, can you point me to an authoritative source
For this claim?
I don't want to take a search of the OOXML specification
without some specific details.
</orcnote>
--
Andrew Pitonyak
My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt
Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
RE: OpenOffice lost again 6000 users (was: Improved OOXML support?)
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Douglas Pitonyak [mailto:andrew@pitonyak.org]
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 22:23
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: OpenOffice lost again 6000 users (was: Improved OOXML support?)
On 10/24/2014 08:50 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> <orcnote> below.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Douglas Pitonyak [mailto:andrew@pitonyak.org]
> Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 17:27
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Spam (9.566):Re: OpenOffice lost again 6000 users (was: Improved OOXML support?)
>
>
> On 10/24/2014 11:42 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>> <orcnote> below.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Andrew Douglas Pitonyak [mailto:andrew@pitonyak.org]
>> Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 06:18
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: OpenOffice lost again 6000 users (was: Improved OOXML support?)
>>
>>
> [ ... ]
>> I am not overly informed on this, but, I think that the primary
>> complaint was that the OOXML ISO standard supports storing proprietary
>> binary blobs that are not part of the standard as aprt of the document.
>>
> [ ... ]
> More specifically, I was under the impression that you could include a
> binary blob of say a doc file.
>
> <orcnote>
> More specifically, can you point me to an authoritative source
> For this claim?
> I don't want to take a search of the OOXML specification
> without some specific details.
> </orcnote>
>
Well, there was a time that I spent many hours worrying about exactly
what was in the standard. I had downloaded a bunch of files and spent
time reading them and following the discussion. If you want
authoritative documents, you can find them places such as here:
http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=51463
http://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/index.html
(search for 29500)
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/office/gg607163%28v=office.14%29.aspx#IIOXML_H2
But I don't think that is what you are asking... I think that you are
asking either:
Am I able to point you to a more authoritative source that says that
people were concerned that the standard allowed embedding arbitrary MSO
binary stuff into OOXML files?
or
Are there concerns well founded?
Let me start by stating that my intent was to clarify their concerns. At
this point I hardly care if their concerns are accurate and I have no
desire to justify them or defend them. Why? Because I am just too busy
to care about it. If I bang my head against the wall and take a stiff
drink, I have vague recollections of an xlink attribute that may end up
referencing a binary version of the document, which, as an end result,
means that supporting OOXML implies that you also support all previous
MSO document formats. I am unable without more study than I am willing
to undertake to remember if that is all linked using OLE or something
else. I only say this because I suspect that it is likely related to
OLE, but I don't really remember anyone saying as much.
I don't like that OOXML relies so heavily on embedding OLE objects (I
think that you can do this sort of thing using ODF as well).
<orcnote>
I have all of the standards. My question is more about what
specifically in the OOXML specification was the source of alarm.
For example, if it is about the OPC section, that doesn't matter -
OPC is a generic container, just like the ODF package is a generic
container. If it is about a specific provision of WordProcessing
ML, or Spreadsheet ML, I am curious whether it is beyond the obvious
ones, like use of OLE objects in both specifications.
I am not concerned about those who took alarm but about the reality
of the provision was that was used as evidence that OOXML was unworthy
(without noticing that ODF has all of the same trap doors when viewed
from the same cynical perspective).
It is not OOXML that relies on OLE so heavily as it is users of Microsoft
Office and their employment of OLE as a means of incorporating useful
formatted/active content into their documents in a manner that allows
editing and repurposing. That this may not be useful in a given inter-
change situation is the usual problem. It is no different for OOXML
than for DOC and XLS, of course. ODF documents derived from .DOC and
.DOCX files will carry the same embedded content, and on Windows at
least, users can use Apache OpenOffice to create exactly the same
problem.
</orcnote>
Back when I was blowing hours trying to read through the standard (and
yeah, I wasted probably even more time reading the ODF standard), I was
struck by how poorly the behavior was defined for the spreadsheet
portion. I remember, at the time, thinking that it was even worse than
the original ODF stuff, which has been fully hammered out at this point.
Perhaps this has been solved for OOXML as well by now, but I am surly
not going to read that stuff again unless a really compelling reason
arises (like a for pay gig, which I am not looking for, I lack the time).
Note that I am exposed so often to OOXML, I should probably care more
about this than I currently do.
Now I can go back to trying to figure out how I can find Northern Spy
apples in the middle of Ohio.
--
Andrew Pitonyak
My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt
Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice lost again 6000 users (was: Improved OOXML support?)
Posted by Andrew Douglas Pitonyak <an...@pitonyak.org>.
On 10/24/2014 08:50 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> <orcnote> below.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Douglas Pitonyak [mailto:andrew@pitonyak.org]
> Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 17:27
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Spam (9.566):Re: OpenOffice lost again 6000 users (was: Improved OOXML support?)
>
>
> On 10/24/2014 11:42 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>> <orcnote> below.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Andrew Douglas Pitonyak [mailto:andrew@pitonyak.org]
>> Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 06:18
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: OpenOffice lost again 6000 users (was: Improved OOXML support?)
>>
>>
> [ ... ]
>> I am not overly informed on this, but, I think that the primary
>> complaint was that the OOXML ISO standard supports storing proprietary
>> binary blobs that are not part of the standard as aprt of the document.
>>
> [ ... ]
> More specifically, I was under the impression that you could include a
> binary blob of say a doc file.
>
> <orcnote>
> More specifically, can you point me to an authoritative source
> For this claim?
> I don't want to take a search of the OOXML specification
> without some specific details.
> </orcnote>
>
Well, there was a time that I spent many hours worrying about exactly
what was in the standard. I had downloaded a bunch of files and spent
time reading them and following the discussion. If you want
authoritative documents, you can find them places such as here:
http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=51463
http://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/index.html
(search for 29500)
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/office/gg607163%28v=office.14%29.aspx#IIOXML_H2
But I don't think that is what you are asking... I think that you are
asking either:
Am I able to point you to a more authoritative source that says that
people were concerned that the standard allowed embedding arbitrary MSO
binary stuff into OOXML files?
or
Are there concerns well founded?
Let me start by stating that my intent was to clarify their concerns. At
this point I hardly care if their concerns are accurate and I have no
desire to justify them or defend them. Why? Because I am just too busy
to care about it. If I bang my head against the wall and take a stiff
drink, I have vague recollections of an xlink attribute that may end up
referencing a binary version of the document, which, as an end result,
means that supporting OOXML implies that you also support all previous
MSO document formats. I am unable without more study than I am willing
to undertake to remember if that is all linked using OLE or something
else. I only say this because I suspect that it is likely related to
OLE, but I don't really remember anyone saying as much.
I don't like that OOXML relies so heavily on embedding OLE objects (I
think that you can do this sort of thing using ODF as well).
Back when I was blowing hours trying to read through the standard (and
yeah, I wasted probably even more time reading the ODF standard), I was
struck by how poorly the behavior was defined for the spreadsheet
portion. I remember, at the time, thinking that it was even worse than
the original ODF stuff, which has been fully hammered out at this point.
Perhaps this has been solved for OOXML as well by now, but I am surly
not going to read that stuff again unless a really compelling reason
arises (like a for pay gig, which I am not looking for, I lack the time).
Note that I am exposed so often to OOXML, I should probably care more
about this than I currently do.
Now I can go back to trying to figure out how I can find Northern Spy
apples in the middle of Ohio.
--
Andrew Pitonyak
My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt
Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org