| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Microsoft Shares Some of Office 2003 | |
|
||
| Time: 04:20 EST/09:20 GMT | News Source: PC World | Posted By: Alex Harris | ||
|
Microsoft says it will license its Office 2003 XML schemas for free, a move that will help outside developers enable other programs to trade data with Microsoft's Office applications. On Monday the company released on its Web site the schema for Word 2003, called WordprocessingML. In December it plans to release the schema for Excel 2003 and for InfoPath 2003. The free licensing arrangement came about after discussions with the Danish government, according to Microsoft. The government is working on creating a Web-based repository of information about the schemas and standards used for its public databases. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 320 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:08:02 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 1845 (67.161.212.73) at 11/20/2003 5:46:59 PM |
|
Since this is like the third time I've seen this story on AW this week without comments, I am now commenting:
Take that Sun "submit-your-schema-to-Oasis-but-nobody-cares" Microsystems! This post was edited by BobSmith on Thursday, November 20, 2003 at 17:48. |
| #2 By 1845 (67.161.212.73) at 11/20/2003 5:48:08 PM |
| Now, that's one cool comment. Three font styles, three lines. I don't see chance. I see providence. |
| #3 By 2459 (24.175.137.164) at 11/20/2003 6:29:46 PM |
| *waits for competitors' next excuse for continued incompatability* ;-) |
| #4 By 1845 (67.161.212.73) at 11/21/2003 5:14:32 PM |
|
First of all, the purpose of XML support in Office 2003, IMO, has nothing to do with interop with other vendors. It has to do with manipulation of business data. It has to do with display and management of business data. It has to do with improving productivity of users that deal with business data. The release of the schemas (how do you reverse engineer a schema?) is a value add for those business users, who use Office 2003 and wish to be more productive.
Other vendors are responsible for themselves. Curious that you singled out a reverse engineering clause in a license that deals with schemas. What the heck does that have to do with schemas. An XSD doc is plain text. It isn't reverse engineerable, because it does't obfuscate itself. I also don't see what the license has tod with the GPL, nor do I see what Microsoft (or any vendor for that matter) should release any software with a GPL-compatible license. It is a very foolish thing to do. You'll notice that even OO.o's big brother, StarOffice, isn't open. It uses dreaded third-party proprietary controls (to make it work better than the pure OSS stuff in OO.o), so can't be GPL'ed. |
| #5 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 11/21/2003 6:17:08 PM |
|
Very gracious of you, Bob, to point out that this does nothing to facilitate interoperability (which is what everyone is clamoring for) and only affects sharing of data properly stored within MS's schemas (which no one has been clamoring for and EVERYONE is currently accomplishing with XML).
In other words no big deal. JW Simon, fortunately, reverse enginerring is legal so that clause bars nothing. |
| #6 By 1845 (67.161.212.73) at 11/22/2003 10:21:08 PM |
|
Strangle hold...spare me the drama! Reverse engineering a .doc file, is not the same as reverse engineering the software. In fact, they have little, if anything, to do with each other. As for license fees, what's your point? If Microsoft did the work, they deserve to collect for it. That's the nature of business. You pay fees to deal with DVDs, mp3, MPEG4, etc. Why should schemas for the most popular word processor in history be any different? Oh yeah, it shouldn't be.
Jerk, you amuse me. I wonder how many businesses do data interchange today in pure XML. I wonder how much business data is contained in Word documents, that can't be interchanged. Hmm, if any of the latter, then your statement is false. If, even one of the former doesn't, then your statement is false. Frankly, I don't understand what your reason for posting is. If you use Microsoft Office, publishing these schemas will help you. If you don't, then why should you even care? BTW, there are a heck of a lot of people (myself included) that are quite happy with Microsoft Office and have no need or desire to interop with other document platforms. You need to lay off the drama too. |
| #7 By 1845 (67.161.212.73) at 11/25/2003 12:34:42 AM |
| Stranglehold is an emotionally loaded term. If I have a stranglehold on you, your very life is at stake. Can you honestly say that you see no drama in applying that life and death term to document schemas? You are the one who seems to be "unable to comprehend anything." |
| #8 By 1845 (67.161.212.73) at 11/25/2003 3:08:56 AM |
|
Now I've got a little more time...
K, once again, mydoc.doc is a file. It isn't software. Do whatever you want to it. It's not illegal. End of story. No more, no less. .doc files aren't software. Schemas aren't software. K, if it's not worthy of congrats to control a format you created, then it doesn't take a huge leap of logic to guess that you don't like licensing. If you are OK with licensing, you should be OK with control of the format (since, after all, the format is controlled by licensing). Your third paragraph. No you don't. No you don't. And, no you don't. I highly doubt you have much document interchange w/Linux or Solaris clients. If you did, I'm sure you worked something out a long time ago to deal with the problem. How about RTF? Yeah, that works just fine, doesn't it? K, problem solved. Microsoft hasn't change the .doc format in a long, long time (like 7 yrs). A few things have been added (smart tag support, smart doc support, etc.), but they don't break the .doc from working in a previous version. So, you're wrong again. Oh, and what is this mass migration from Office? Office revenue is up, no other company seems to say anything about productivity suite revenue, so I'd only assume that, if anything, Office is gaining, not loosing share. Nice drama, but in the real world, you're full of crap. lol, I'm a silly child? Perhaps. It's obvious you know little about arguement, since you don't refute my points, but instead insult me. What do you suppose that says about your intelligence and maturity? |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 320 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:08:03 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
