Re: Open Office file formats (Oasis-open) and gnumeric

[Russell McOrmond <russell flora ca>]

On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Jody Goldberg wrote:

> implementable.  As an example,  I'm experimenting with a form of
> conditional formats that is different from MS Excel.

  I think one of the differences is that I think of a spreadsheet as a
tool used on a network, and you may be thinking of it as a tool used on a
desktop.  Will users know when they are using features that will be lossy
when exported to formats other than the Gnumeric format?


  Is this feature worth the "best viewed by" problems that will exist?  
You know the market share problem that Gnumeric has relative to others,
and as we move to a network centric environment where compatibility is
more important than functionality, with this type of work actually hinder
the adoption of Gnumeric?


  I am part way through reading "The Innovator's Dilemma" which might as
well be a manual for the Free Software movement.  One of the
transformations that appears to be happening is a greater movement to
sharing office productivity documents off of ones own desk, either
automatically via ODBC-like connections or (already common) via email
attachments.  I happen to link Internet networking with Free Software as
being co-dependent, and see the already underway transformation as being
very relevant to our community.


BTW: I am advocating that software developers read a "HarperBusiness
Essentials" book.  I'm not a MBA-type coming in trying to tell Free
Software developers how to do their job, but a Free Software
developer/advocate turned public policy wonk who may have noticed a trend
which the Free Software community should try to make use of.

> It is my considered opinion that file formats, at least for
> spreadsheets, are simply too high in markup relative to content for them
> to be standarized.

  If you haven't already, check out the book.  One suggestion is that
during a transformative change that the market is willing to give up some
features (downgrade) to capture the transformation.  What you are thinking
of as added feature may actually be considered a liability by the market
which is more interested in compatibility than functionality.  What is the
common denominator may be the only features that are used, and a project
with high native functionality that has a low common denominator will be
evaluated as being of low value.

  I believe that basic office productivity tools (including spreadsheets)  
are going to be commodified.  Those projects that push functionality over
compatibility during this transformation may find themselves forever stuck
as a niche product.  Innovation needs to be moved away from the network 
layer (which includes file formats) to some other layer in the 
application for that project to remain relevant.


  Can you imagine a small team of people trying to innovate by changing 
the TCP/IP stack outside of a standards body?  It may not be too long from 
now when innovating on office productivity communications/file formats are 
looked upon in the same way.

> It is certainly useful to support some common format as an exchange
> medium, but it tempting to leave xls as that form for now given its
> pervasiveness.

  Excel is a branded tool from a third party, and to suggest it is not a
standard is overkill (that third party is a convicted monopolist).  Even 
a renamed snapshot of the current format would be more likely to consider 
a standard.  If the OASIS Open Office TC ends up with an XML variation of 
the same functionality, then they will have served their purpose.

---
 Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
 Any 'hardware assist' for communications, whether it be eye-glasses, 
 VCR's, or personal computers, must be under the control of the citizen 
 and not a third party.   -- http://www.flora.ca/russell/