A recent News.com article by Martin LaMonica reports on the ODF vs OOXML war. The report mentions the arguments over one standard vs two competing standards. But shouldn't we be trying to solve - not prolong - the interoperability gap?

I want to start off by reminding everyone that Microsoft was invited from the very beginning to participate in developing the OpenDocument Format. Microsoft, claimed that it's competitors were ganging up on it, apparently forgetting that its competitors also compete against each other. In the long road leading up to this point, Microsoft wound up deciding to promote the idea that two or more competing standards is the best way to serve the world. But they miss the goal set forth by the OpenDocument technical committee - a single standard that anyone could implement would mean everyone can share documents with far improved reliability than trying to convert between document formats.

Consider this. Any 2 businesses using different OS and application stacks, and desiring to work together, will need to either convert between documents or choose a single standard on which to base their document exchanges. The current document conversion process doesn't work very well, precisely because Microsoft's binary document format is both undocumented and non-libre . Even given two distinct XML formats, there will still be a need for conversion between the two, and this is very likely to cause numerous problems, since OOXML documents may very well contain binary elements that cannot be translated to OpenDocument. Where does this leave the two potential business partners?

It leaves the two potential partners in the same position every business is in right now - having to choose, in some cases between complete software stacks. In other words, allowing two competing standards, especially where office document formats are concerned, maintains the current status quo - a continued interoperability gap. This gap will lead many businesses to the conclusion that they must continue to standardize on one office suite rather than on a document format. That may not be necessary in truth, but it will be the reality.

A business whose leadership objects non-libre software may find it difficult to work without non-libre software, simply because they will face the same translation difficulties they currently face. Small business may find it difficult to grow because it's potential customers have chosen to standardize on a different format, and thus office suite. In other words, two standards will propagate the monopoly Microsoft already has, rather than promote competition. No wonder Microsoft continues to insist that two standards is better than one.

Two standards will better serve Microsoft than the world, and the companies participating in OOXML's development cannot be blind to that fact. They are either cowards, afraid to "just say no" to Microsoft, or accomplices in Microsoft's efforts. Two standards will not only affect businesses, but individuals as well. Why should my relatives feel compelled to run two office suites in order to be able to share documents with me? Why should I feel compelled to run Microsoft solutions to share documents with them? Why should a business feel compelled to run two different software stacks in order to do business?

This is what Microsoft has never answered. How does two standards serve the world any better? How will the need to continue converting - mostly likely with less than perfect results - serve the world any better? KOffice can improve its OpenDocument implementation, but converting between two distinct document formats is simply added work for the development team. The same goes for Microsoft and OpenOffice.org/StarOffice and Abiword - any office suite out there.

That raises the second part of the problem - the development teams behind the various competing projects will now need to implement two standards, since converters aren't the ideal solution. How does duplicitous efforts benefit anyone? Why should developers have to implement two standards, or even choose between them? One standard solves all the problems in one fell swoop. It solves interoperability issues. It solves the need to implement numerous, competing standards, allowing developers to focus on improving their programs, rather than worry about who can read the documents. It solves the problems of businesses, government agencies and individuals being able to share documents.

I encourage Microsoft to show some real leadership, to solve problems instead of creating new ones. I encourage the vendors working on OOXML to realize the fact that they, too, are contributing to the problem, and not to the solution. I encourage the national bodies involved in the document standards battle, and the ISO, to consider the point of a solid standard, and whether a competing standard will really benefit the world. Having a choice of office suites is simply not realistic unless we have a single document standard, and one already exists.