Author: Italo Vignoli

Unfortunately, I keep reading about open-source software advocates who happily use Microsoft’s proprietary DOCX, XLSX and PPTX formats for their documents and therefore prefer proprietary software such as OnlyOffice to LibreOffice. Others write outrageous things such as: “OOXML is a standard format, and we have to accept it.”

I would therefore like to take this opportunity to clarify, once and for all, why OOXML has never been, is not, and will never be a standard format unless Microsoft decides to completely redesign its office applications.

I consider this impossible in light of past decisions, such as Excel’s inability to handle elements of the human genome properly. This forced the scientific community to change the names of these elements due to Microsoft’s refusal to fix an obvious Excel bug.

In other words, because of Microsoft, all of us citizens of the world have been affected by the change of the names of some elements of our genome, with all that this entails for scientific research and, consequently, for the treatment of genetic diseases. This is an enormously important fact that has not received sufficient publicity in the media, but it illustrates how willing Microsoft is to overlook everything for its own commercial interests.

But let’s get back to OOXML.

In theory, OOXML (Office Open XML) is an ISO/IEC standard (ISO/IEC 29500), despite heavy technical criticism being raised by many parties during the process and completely ignored by ISO/IEC. This shows that it is not a standard, let alone an open standard.

The following is a summary of these criticisms:

Complexity of specifications: the standard is extremely voluminous (~7,000 pages), making it virtually impossible for third parties to implement correctly. This contrasts sharply with competing standards such as ODF, which are much more concise.

Implementation inconsistencies: Microsoft Office applications do not implement the standardized version (ISO/IEC 29500 Strict), but use the “Transitional” variant, which includes compatibility features with legacy formats that contradict the stated goal of being a clean, modern, and above all open and standard format.

Proprietary dependencies: The specifications refer to several undocumented legacy behaviors of previous versions of Microsoft Office and require implementers to decode Windows-specific features to achieve compatibility.

Binary blob remnants: Despite being based on XML, OOXML incorporates binary data structures in many places, particularly for backward compatibility with legacy formats, and this compromises the transparency that XML should guarantee.

Platform-specific elements: The standard contains Windows-specific elements related to fonts, rendering, and other system behaviors that make any cross-platform implementation difficult or even impossible.

Controversy over the standardization process: The fast-track approval process adopted for OOXML by ISO/IEC was highly controversial, with allegations of procedural irregularities and vote manipulation raising legitimate doubts about the validity of the standard.

These issues meant that, although OOXML technically became a standard, it has always been a proprietary Microsoft format specification and not a truly vendor-neutral open standard.

In the coming weeks, I will explore some of the claims made in this post in detail, with all the relevant technical elements.

For now, anyone interested can take a look at this PDF presentation from 2018, referring to ISO/IEC 29500-1:2016 (and the corresponding ECMA 376), which lists some of the issues and provides technical details that clarify at least some of the claims.

Please be aware that some of the slides referring to ECMA 376 are related to an old version of the standard and as such may be obsolete. The presentation will be updated with references to the current version of ECMA 376.

Whenever I talk to other technology users — including CTOs, CSOs and ICT managers, who in theory should have a certain level of expertise — I realise that most of them never consider standards when using applications, devices or websites.

Users just want everything to work, but they don’t realise the fundamental role that standards, especially open standards, play in making this happen. Open standards actually offer users a significant advantage over the proprietary solutions they use every day.

An open standard is a publicly available set of rules that govern how technology works. Anyone can use, develop or improve them. Examples include HTML for websites, USB for devices and PDF for documents. (And of course, the Open Document Format – ODF – as used by LibreOffice.) These are not owned by any company, and therefore benefit end users.

That’s why they’re important to you.

1. You are not tied in

Open standards reduce vendor lock-in. This means that users are not forced to use a single product or ecosystem from a single company to have control over their data and tools.

For example, documents saved in an open format can be managed with multiple applications. If you change your device or software, your files will still work. You can choose the best solution for you, rather than being forced to use what the supplier provides.

It’s easy to take this freedom for granted until it’s gone. Just ask the Windows 10 users who had to abandon working software and PCs due to Microsoft’s business strategies.

2. Better compatibility between devices and applications

Open standards enable different products to work together more seamlessly. For example, your phone can connect to any laptop, your browser can open any website and your headphones can connect to any device. None of this is accidental. It is the result of open, shared standards.

For end users, this means fewer headaches and less time spent troubleshooting or wondering why something ‘should work’ but doesn’t.

3. More competition and better products

When standards are open, more companies can use them. This increases competition.

Competition leads to better prices, more advanced features, and much faster growth. Instead of handcuffing users with proprietary formats, companies must earn their trust.

As users, you benefit from greater choice and improved quality throughout the entire value chain.

4. Longer data life

Proprietary formats can disappear. Companies may change direction, discontinue products or go out of business. Ask the Windows 10 users mentioned earlier for more information.

Open standards tend to last much longer because they are not tied to the business strategies of a single company. Even after decades, data stored in an open format remains accessible, convertible and preservable.

This is important if users want their photos, documents or work to survive for longer than the lifespan of a single product.

5. Better accessibility

Open standards are often designed with accessibility in mind or to facilitate the proper functioning of accessibility tools.

Screen readers, alternative input devices and assistive software all rely on consistent, documented rules. When standards are open, developers and accessibility experts can test, improve and adapt them.

The result is technology that works better for more users.

6. Greater transparency and trust

With open standards, the rules are visible. Anyone can examine, test and report on them.

This transparency helps to identify security issues earlier and reduces the risk of behaviour that only benefits one supplier going unnoticed. While open does not automatically mean secure, it does mean fewer black boxes.

Over time, this increases users’ trust in the technology.

7. A healthier technology ecosystem

Open standards encourage collaboration and combat fragmentation between products because developers can focus on improvements rather than reinventing the basics or figuring out how to work around closed systems.

A healthier ecosystem means faster innovation and fewer dead ends for users. Things evolve, but they don’t break all the time or at the whim of vendors who rely on planned obsolescence.

Summary

In short, open standards are not flashy and are rarely directly visible to users, but they quietly influence the reliability, flexibility and fairness of the technologies we use every day.

When standards are open, users have more control and choice and experience fewer surprises. And in the long run, these are significant advantages.

Open standards don’t make headlines. Instead, they work quietly behind the scenes to define how information is created, shared and stored. However, as digital ecosystems become more complex and centralised, open standards are becoming increasingly important.

One of the best examples is the Open Document Format (ODF), the native format of LibreOffice documents.

Open standards in the evolving digital world

The current digital environment is characterised by certain trends, such as cloud platforms, subscription software, artificial intelligence-based tools, and tightly integrated ecosystems. While these tools are powerful, they also increase the lock-in effect exerted by Big Tech.

Open standards act as a counterbalance. They provide shared rules that anyone can implement to maintain system interoperability and user control. When a format is open, no single company can decide how information is stored or who has access to it.

With ever-increasing data volumes and documents being transformed into long-term digital archives, this independence is becoming critical.

ODF was designed with one simple goal: to enable users to read and edit documents on any platform and with any software at any time. This goal is still absolutely valid today.

Because ODF is openly specified and standardised, it allows for the coexistence of multiple tools. LibreOffice and other editors can all work with the same files. Even proprietary software can support ODF without facing legal barriers.

Looking to the future, this aspect is more important than ever. Documents are now inputs for automated workflows, archives for public documents and sources for analysis with artificial intelligence tools, not just files on a desktop. Open formats enable these uses without any constraints.

Government, politics and long-term access

The future of ODF looks particularly secure in the public sector.

Governments are responsible for documents that must remain accessible for decades. Using proprietary formats carries risks in this context: companies change strategy, products are withdrawn from the market (Windows 10 docet), and licences evolve. Open standards reduce this risk.

Since digital sovereignty and transparency are political priorities, ODF is perfectly aligned with these objectives, as it enables public institutions to choose their software freely and maintain consistent access to all data.

ODF in the era of cloud computing and artificial intelligence

Contrary to popular belief, standard and open document formats remain highly relevant in an era of cloud computing and artificial intelligence.

Cloud platforms store documents in the format chosen by the user. If the format is open, users can move, analyse, edit and reuse data across different systems. The XML-based structure of ODF files makes processing documents at the development level easier, which is a key aspect of automation and AI-based workflows.

Since artificial intelligence tools rely heavily on existing documents for training, summarisation and decision support, transparent formats offer a practical advantage as well as a philosophical one.

Future challenges

Open standards are not without their challenges. They require ongoing governance (responsibility of ODF Technical Committee), consistent implementation across tools (which is lacking, because of the strategy of proprietary and open core software, which are pushing users towards proprietary formats against the user’s own interests) and widespread adoption (which has not yet been achieved for the aforementioned reason). Users favour default choices, which are often proprietary, for convenience and lack of expertise.

The future of ODF, and of open standards more generally, depends on continued support from institutions, developers, and users who value openness, even when it is less visible.

Why the future favours open standards

The long-term trend is clear. As digital systems become more powerful, the cost of lock-in grows with them. Open standards offer a way to share innovation without giving up control.

ODF may not be flashy, but it represents a lasting idea: that documents belong to the people who create them rather than the software they use. In the future of open standards, this idea will be more important than ever.