馬來西亞製造商聯盟對Open Office標準回應

FMM’s Comments on Open Office Standards

The Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers (FMM) being a member on SIRIM’s TechnicalCommittee for E-Commerce (TC4), would like to comment on the OpenDocument Format(ODF) and the Microsoft Office Open XML (MSOOXML) formats in response to a recentarticle in one of the English dailies. The newspaper article had erroneously highlighted thatMSOOXML has been recognised by the private sector and endorsed by the Prime MinisterYAB Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi.

2. The TC4 has amongst its Terms of Reference the responsibility of undertaking thetechnical review of appropriate standards relating to ICT and e-commerce. In accordancewith these Terms of Reference, the TC4 reviewed both OpenDocument Format (ODF) andthe Microsoft Office Open XML (MSOOXML) format.

3. FMM would like to set the record straight that the claim on private sector support forMSOOXML is inaccurate. In addition, FMM is of the view that the YAB Prime Minister’spresence at the launch of the Halal Industry Development Corporation Halal Portal shouldnot be construed as an endorsement for MSOOXML.

No strong support for MSOOXML

4. MSOOXML does not have strong support at the ISO level as a Draft InternationalStandard. Countries with strong Information Technology establishment have voiced out theirconcern by voting "Disapprove with comments". Already, reviewers in United States, CzechRepublic, Denmark, Canada and many others have raised many technical issues against thespecification. Malaysia has also raised some technical concerns.

5. The newspaper article states that there is support from the Malaysian private sector.However, the FMM and other private sector organisations have not endorsed MSOOXML forfast track approval as an ISO Standard.

6. Fifteen National Bodies under the ISO including Malaysia had raised their objectionsin the February 2007 Vote against the "Fast Tracking" of MSOOXML. Their objections werebased on the following facts:

a. There is already an ISO standard for document file format, namely ISO/IEC26300:2006 (ODF) which serves the same purpose. It has been in development forover six years. In contrast, MSOOXML has only been in development for two years.

b. A normal standard would take several years in development, and a year or two withinISO before it becomes a true standard. The “Fast Tracking” process was designed forvery small and well implemented standards which require minimal modification. TheMSOOXML therefore is not a suitable “Fast Track” candidate because it is a large6,039 page document. The MSOOXML was only published in December 2006 andsubmitted to ISO in January 2007.

c. Within 30 days, the National Bodies had identified numerous technical problems withthe specification in that it is not complete, it contains duplicate specifications whichare almost similar and it does not support the billions of documents as claimed.

d. In the subsequent five months, the National Bodies have found even more editorial,technical and general issues that must be addressed. Spending more time to review the6,000+ page document could raise even more issues. On average, it takes one day toreview one page of specifications. The ISO26300 (ODF) took over 800 days to review700+ pages. With 6,000+ pages, five months is indeed a very short time andinsufficient for a thorough review of the MSOOXML.

e. The proposed standard unnecessarily redefines and contradicts many international andwidely used standards.

These are significant issues raised by the international community, and instead of investingtime in addressing and fixing these problems, the proponents have chosen to ignore them butto continue to push for its standard to be recognised.

A Better Solution - ODF

7. The OpenDocument Format (ODF) is a far better standard as a document file format.It is already an ISO standard (ISO26300:2006) after six years of development. It wasdeveloped by competing vendors who recognise the utility of standardizing into onespecification.

8. The Malaysian Government has already announced its plan to move to greater choiceand competition among office application providers that support open standards, in particular,ODF. Besides Malaysia, other countries that have adopted pro-ODF policies include Japan,Belgium, Norway, France, Denmark, Brazil, Poland, Croatia, Italy and USA.

9. ODF is a true vendor and technology-neutral standard, which can be implemented byany vendor, be it Free and Open Source (FOSS) like OpenOffice.org, web-based like GoogleDocuments, and even proprietary like StarOffice and IBM Workplace.

10. Any vendor is completely free to create and deploy file filters to support ODFnatively. Already there exists third party Add-Ins to allow Microsoft Office suite to read andwrite ODF. If a vendor chooses to exclude ODF support in its own products, then it is theirown undoing in excluding themselves from procurement processes.

ODF is a truly open standard, free of licensing and limitations.

Since millions of users around the world demand an open standard, free of licensing and nolimitations on the choice of productivity applications, then the conclusion is obvious forMalaysia to support ODF.
August 28, 2007