you are not logged in

Navigation

User login

OpenXML versus ODF

Both OpenXML and ODF (for more details: see the references) are candidates for M-XML, the intended MIXED XML format for archiving electronic data.

We do not expect to adopt OpenXML or ODF in their entirety, but we seek to identify a subset that meets our objectives. In order to be able to make such a choice, we need a comparison between OpenXML and ODF.

What others say

The Wikipedia has an article (see the references) on the comparison between OpenXML and ODF.

There is a white paper consisting of an overview of OpenXML (see the references), saying

Various document standards and specifications exist; these include HTML, XHTML, PDF and its subsets, ODF, DocBook, DITA, and RTF. Like the numerous standards that represent bitmapped images, including TIFF/IT, TIFF/EP, JPEG 2000, and PNG, each was created for a different set of purposes. OpenXML addresses the need for a standard that covers the features represented in the existing document corpus. To the best of our knowledge, it is the only XML document format that supports every feature in the binary formats.

If we want to support every feature found in Microsoft binary formats, OpenXML seems to be the best choice. But maybe ODF also supports all interesting features, and maybe less is more. The less features you support, the better you can guarantee that they will be preserved.

The comparison

In order to make a comparison between ODF and OpenXML, we have to list their features. This is done in the subsections OpenXML and ODF.


3th standard

As discussed in this article on slashdot, there might be a third interesting option to look at.