Is DOCX really an open standard?

It is hard to believe that even in 2012 we struggle with standards as common as those of documents, presentations and spreadsheets. The de facto formats of these of course are those used by Microsoft Office (docx, pptx, xlsx (collectively called OpenXML or OOXML)), which causes a growing number of Libre and Open Office users such as myself much chagrin.

Like everyone else, the majority of office files I receive in my inbox belong to one of the OOXML category, and invariably as I edit and return the document to the owner, they complain that I have in some way corrupted or changed the elements within because of my choice of software, which is usually true. Then they berate me for being using “crappy” open source software and in one case, for being an “anti-Microsoft hippy”.

Let’s be clear, I am not an anti-Microsoft hippy. Like many of you, I run Linux and under a normal scenario, do not have access to Windows, so running MS Office is really not an option. Even if it were, I would detest having to pay for it. So for the simple reason of including myself and the millions of others who use the various open office suites out there, I request that you stop using OOXML formats, at least until Microsoft truly supports them in MS Office.

I’ve been angrily told before that OOXML or OpenXML is indeed an Open Format, which is technically correct. But there’s more to the story than that. If there weren’t, Libre and Open Office would have built perfect support for it a long time ago. They realize that not fully supporting Microsoft formats is one of the key repellers to new users for their base, so they would not not implement OOXML by choice.

The real reason that these software do not fully support OOXML is because there is a difference between the OOXML specification, and OOXML implementation in MS Office. To understand why, you have to familiarize yourself with three standards:

  • ECMA 376
  • ISO/IEC 29500 Transitional
  • ISO/IEC 29500 Strict

ECMA is a private international standards organization much like the better known ISO. The difference between the two is that ECMA is made out of companies, while ISO is made out of countries. There is certainly a need for both them in the technology market.

ISO along with another consortium called OASIS adopted the ODF (Open Document Format) back in 2006 to solve the document standardization crisis. This is the format that is used by Libre and Open office, along with most other open office suites. Such a format becoming successful would of course threaten Microsoft's already established monopoly in the Document market, which at the time ran on closed formats such as doc, ppt, and xls. So in 2007, they decided to create their own open standard with ECMA called OpenXML or OOXML, otherwise known as ECMA-376. This was the new “XML based” replacement for ODF, which of course seemed unnecessary to ISO and was initially rejected. But with the use of some muscle, Microsoft got the proposal fast-tracked in ISO even though reportedly 20 out of the 30 countries involved were not interested in passing it. This however didn’t stop the ISO secretariat Lisa Rachjel from pushing it through anyway after deciding “to move Open XML forward after consulting with staff at the International Technology Task Force”.

So ISO had a new incoming standard, but specific clauses of it still met resistance. To solve this problem, it was proposed that OOXML be split into two sub-standards, namely ISO 29500 Transitional, and ISO 29500 Strict. The Strict version was that which was accepted by ISO, and the Transitional version was fairly granted to Microsoft to allow them to slowly curb out older features from the closed source days. Nothing wrong with this, its only fair to their users.

However, the problem arose when Microsoft decided not to fully implement the Strict version of the standard in Office 2010. As published my Microsoft here and stated by Wikipedia here:

Microsoft Office 2010 provides read support for ECMA-376, read/write support for ISO/IEC 29500 Transitional, and read support for ISO/IEC 29500 Strict.

What this means is that when you save a document in MS Office 2010 or prior in any of the ‘X’ formats, you are not saving them in the advertised OpenXML format. This document will hence NOT be properly readable by other software such as Libre and Open Office and they will make changes to the document when they are opened and saved within them. The problem hence lies with the former, not the latter.

But, to be fair, we should note that we have been promised full ODF support in the upcoming Office 15. Alex Brown has an excellent post on this subject with more details about the gap between the promises Microsoft made in 2008 to what they actually delivered in 2010. Hopefully they won’t follow suit and actually keep their promises this time. I am actually genuinely excited to find out.

Lately there has been a shift towards the usage of PDF, especially when it comes to documents that do not need to be edited such as resumes, essays, and reports. The reason for the change of course is an organic realization that PDF is a no-bullshit format that works consistently and predictably across all platforms. While PDF is not exactly an open format, Adobe does provide free and consistent specifications for all to implement it as they please. If you are an MS Office user and also have been a part of the great PDF shift, you too have something to gain from the true open implementation of OOXML.

I would still prefer to see ODF win the battle, but if this happens, then at least their will be much fewer reasons to complain. Plus, Libre Office developers won’t be jerked around as much in trying to play catch up to an always moving target.

Anyway in the meanwhile, please save your documents in ODF when you use Microsoft Office.

15 Replies to “Is DOCX really an open standard?”

    1. In Higher Ed, I am pushing to get universities to understand the issue here and to focus on the open standard. If MS plays games here and not implement the strict standard, then they seem open, yet preclude others from fair competition. I appreciate your great article.

      1. very very good @jacquesdup. Thumbs up for your efforts.

        We ALL definitely need to actively push libreoffice(ODF standard), only then interoperability will be solved in true sense.

  1. i use linux , and i hate to use wine or virtualbox to use MsOffice on top of it. I fully use libreoffice and ODF formats only for myself.
    i FORCE my contacts to install libreoffice on their PC, by emailing them .odt(or other ODF format) documents only. I do not hit “send” button of my emailbox, with a .docx as an attachment: This is my strict policy, come whatever.

    Even if others email me a .docx , i import it it in libreoffice, then reformat it slightly to accomodate for importing errors in format, and then make the changes and “save the document in .odt” and then email it back. When the contact me back , on how to open it , i tell them to install libreoffice.

    By doing this literally i have forced hundreds of my clientele enterprise corporations, students and bosses to have libreoffice installed on their PC.
    Whenever i am supposed to give a talk or invited for a talk, i specially inform them to have libreoffice installed on their presentation room/board room PC(which are connected to projector), to have any presentation delivered by me
    I actively evangelise them to see the benifits in switching to open format fully .
    slowly and slowly ,others have seen benifits and many in my contact have switched “fully” to libreoffice.

  2. but i will still accept the fact that: libreoffice “impress” 4.2 , by default, does NOT make as BEAUTIFUL presentation as Microsoft Powerpoint 2013.
    The templates provided with impress(or even available on website), are still ameteurish, do not look professional.
    the default arrows etc made with impress are not as good as powerpoint.
    This is a MAJOR issue , we need to address it in libreoffice impress.

  3. I enjoyed your post, but a correction needs to be made:

    “While PDF is not exactly an open format, Adobe does provide free and consistent specifications for all to implement it as they please.”

    PDF has been an ISO standard since 2008, so I’m not sure how that would classify as “not exactly open”? Other than that, good read.

  4. Would love to use LibreOffice, but when I import my work instruction to try it out I find that LO does not support centering a section vertically on the page. My title pages are centered this way, and importing breaks them.
    A little searching turns up this bug report
    where we see this has been a problem for over 4 years (more that 1 at the time of this article.) Seriously? Does the ODF just not support vertical alignments? I have to basically turn my document into a web page with frames just to center text on the first page?

  5. I am using Softmaker Office 2012, which only supports ODT 1.0 and 1.1. Unfortunately some of my colleagues use LibreOffice which defaults to ODT 1.2 Extended. Now I can’t open password protected ODT files because 1.2 Extended uses AES-256 instead of 1.0/1.1’s Blowfish. So much for interoperability.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: