IBM's Robert Weir posted some new ODF articles in his blog, which are worth reading. Here are some quotes to get you interested in reading the full blog entries:

From “Math You Can't Use”

“Now if Microsoft had merely wanted to create a proprietary format for equations and use that in Word in order to trap their customers onto that platform, then I'd simply say that's not my concern and I'd blog about my heirloom tomatoes or something else. But when this shows up in a nominally open standard destined for approval by ISO, then this raises my eyebrows a little. The obvious choice would have been to simply reuse MathML. So, why are they creating, and standardizing a whole new math markup language? Are there no standards worth reusing? Will XPS replace PDF, VML replace SVG, Windows Media Photo format replace PNG, OMML replace MathML, and OOXML replace ODF? Let's say "No" to OMML and "Yes" to MathML, the math you can use.”

From “Follow the Leader”

“As the following table shows, Excel formulas have never been publicly specified, even though Microsoft has been producing file format documentation for various binary, HTML, XHTML and XML Excel formats for over 9 years. It was only after the ODF TC decided to document our spreadsheet formulas and formed a Subcommittee to do so that Ecma TC45 decided to follow.

...

Now I ask you, who is rushing? ODF took 2 ? years to standardize 700 pages. Microsoft is trying to standardize a 6,000 page behemoth in just 1 year. I think the argument that ODF was rushed through under political pressure just doesn't stand up to even cursory examination. Honestly, I think this FUD is being spread around as a smoke screen to hide the fact that OOXML is the one that is really being rushed.”

From “Throwing stones at people in glass houses”

“Ecma TC45, the committee producing Office Open XML (OOXML), does not operate in a transparent manner. They do not have a public mailing list archive. They have not published their meeting minutes. The comments they receive from the public are not open for the public to read. The public has no idea what exactly the TC is working on, what issues they think are critical, whether the TC is in unanimous agreement, whether there is spirited debated or whether Microsoft dominates and decides everything.”

From “Cum mortuis in lingua mortua”

“I will not comment on its quality or merits, but merely note that it was rejected by the W3C in favor of Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) specification which became a W3C Recommendation (that's what the W3C calls their standards) in 2001. Since then, SVG 1.0 was upgraded to SVG 1.1. in 2003 and several mobile profiles (SVG Tiny and SVG Basic) were created. SVG has native support in Firefox and Opera, with Plugins available for most other browsers. There is support on mobile phones and PDA's. A search of Amazon.com shows 19 books dedicated to SVG. The SVGOpen Conference has been going for 5 years strong. This all adds up to SVG being an established, open standard, widely implemented with a thriving implementor/user community and signs of continued innovation. It is a standard with a past, a present and a future.

...

The thing I wish to bring to your attention is that VML, the same VML rejected in 1998, is now being proposed as part of the draft Ecma Office Open XML.”

Many of you might have read the recent news in the press about an analysis of the OpenOffice.org security. The report mentioned in the article can be found here. The page includes a link to a PDF version of the article "In-depth analysis of the viral threats with OpenOffice.org documents".

Here are some of the thoughts that came to my mind while reading the article:

• First, users should always be very careful running code that they don't know, independent of the platform or software they are using. Actually, the same is true for following instructions, because often users do something harmful to themselves because someone told them to do something.

  Or to put it differently, once you let the thief or murder into your house it's much tougher to ensure security. Thus, preventing the initial attack is very important.

• Yes, ZIP and XML are open transparent technologies which make it easy for someone to include additional elements, including malicious ones. However, the transparent nature of these technologies also make it easy to detect malicious elements.

  It's like with open source in general. Yes, on the one hand the availability of source code makes it easier to identify and exploit security holes. However, for the same reasons issues can be identified and fixed faster as well.

  I just quote one sentence from the analysis here: "Such an in-depth study would not have been possible with proprietary software." (second last page of the article)

• Yes, the cross-platform scripting support of OpenOffice.org makes it possible to run macros (including malicious ones) across platforms, and thus the risks are theoretically higher. However, at the same time potential benefits like writing code only once for all platforms are higher as well.

  Driving a 500 horse power sports car is theoretically more dangerous than 70 horse power compact car because people can drive faster and thus kill themselves more easily. However, a sports car does not have to be more dangerous. If one drives the sports car carefully, there is no higher risk. And if someone likes to enjoy the fun of a sports car, than the risk of being killed in a car crash is something one has to live with.

• Military government agencies are developing extensions for OpenOffice.org. They most likely would not do that if they were seriously concerned about the security of OpenOffice.org compared to available alternatives.

• The people involved in writing the security analysis were very impressed by the fast response from the OpenOffice.org including Sun Microsystems. There is a very positive statement in the report! Just take a look at summary on the second last page of the article!

• External security audits by organizations like the ESAT are great, because the feedback helps to develop a very secure office productivity solution based on expert knowledge.

• Due to the availability of the source code, companies (e.g. OpenOffice.org contributors, anti-virus vendors, document management system vendors) and government organizations (e.g. all the ministries already using OpenOffice.org) can help developing new security features and concepts for OpenOffice.org.

Hopefully my thoughts will provide you with another perspective on the issue and the statements made in the press.

You should register today if you want to attend this year's OpenOffice.org Conference. It's slowly getting crowded. The number of registered attendees is growing every day, and in order to make sure that you get in as well, you should register now.

The list of speakers and sponsors is quite impressive. In order to get some impressions from last year's conference you can check out my old blog entries here, here and here.

I'm sure it will be a lot of fun again!

"That's because you're going to quickly see that Office 2007 looks and feels a whole heck of a lot different from earlier versions of Microsoft Office.

How different? I think most users are going to find the new Office confusing, annoying, and not in the least bit better than what's already on their desktop. I don't know about you, but you can take Office 2007's Ribbon user interface and use it for a cat toy, as far as I'm concerned."

Found here.