The Role of ODF in the Era of Digital Identity and Authentication

Digital identity has become an integral part of everyday life. We use it to access work tools and sign documents online, and it is even replacing physical identity cards. However, most discussions on the subject focus on authentication systems, encryption and biometrics, ignoring the formats that actually carry our information.

This is where the OpenDocument Format (ODF) quietly becomes important. At first glance, ODF appears to be a straightforward alternative to proprietary formats. However, its features give it a broader role in an increasingly digital world based on identity and trust.

ODF files can be read by users because they use a standard version of the XML schema, are well documented, and are free from any constraints. This transparency is essential when documents become part of identity-related workflows.

In most systems, identity is not just a login, but a collection of artefacts such as contracts, certificates, licences, registrations and evidence. These artefacts often exist in document form: for example, a signed agreement can represent authorisation, a certificate can establish credentials and a form can activate access.

When documents play this role, the format is important because if it is opaque, closed or controlled by a single vendor — the OOXML format has all these characteristics — it cannot guarantee long-term trust. ODF, on the other hand, is transparent, open, predictable and verifiable, and is developed by a consortium of companies. Anyone can verify how documents are structured, how metadata is stored and how signatures are applied.

Modern authentication goes beyond usernames and passwords to include digital signatures, document-level permissions, and audit trails. ODF supports all these elements practically: digital signatures can be embedded in ODF files, metadata can capture authorship, timestamps, and revision history, and version tracking can establish who changed what and when.

Because the format is open, these features can be independently validated. There is no need to trust a ‘black box’ to confirm whether a document is authentic or altered.

Furthermore, digital identity systems rarely exist in isolation. Governments, businesses and individuals use different platforms. Interoperability is not an option, but a requirement.

The open ODF standard facilitates the exchange of documents between identity systems without compromising trust. Documents created in one system can be verified in another without losing their structure or meaning. This is important for cross-border use cases, public sector documents, and long-term archives, where documents may need to be validated decades later.

Identity does not always equate to real-time access. Will the document still be accessible in 20 years’ time? Will its signature still be verifiable? Will its content still be controllable?

ODF was designed with longevity in mind. Because it is not tied to the strategies of any single company, it is particularly well suited to documents that need to outlive specific software products or authentication platforms. For digital identity, this durability is a subtle yet fundamental advantage.

Therefore, ODF does not replace authentication systems, identity providers or cryptographic protocols. That is not its purpose. Rather, ODF is a reliable container; a means of storing, exchanging and preserving identity-related documents without introducing unnecessary risks or dependencies.

In an ideal digital identity stack, ODF operates silently in the background to determine how trust is built and maintained. In the era of digital identity and authentication, this makes ODF more relevant than ever.

Relaunching ODF Advocacy as ODF News

I decided to start the current campaign, with one blog post per week focusing on the different aspects of Open Document Format, to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the standardisation by OASIS, which happened in May 2005.

My hope was to raise the interest around ODF, which is the document format that every conscious user of office suites should adopt in order to maintain full control on his intellectual property (even if we are not professional writers or researchers, the content of our documents is our intellectual property, and we have the right to decide when, how and with whom we want to share it).

My articles were targeting LibreOffice users, as they have the privilege – over other office suite users – of creating documents (and I am not referring only to text, but also to spreadsheets and presentations or drawings) with the only program adopting ODF as native document format.

I wanted to strengthen their understanding of ODF, and explain in detail the enormous value of the open and standard document format they are using in comparison with the closed and proprietary Microsoft office document format, which is unfortunately the most used worldwide to maintain Microsoft lock in and reinforce Microsoft monopoly.

Software supporting OOXML – the technical name of the closed and proprietary Microsoft office document format – as their native document format are in fact strengthening Microsoft lock in just because in their paramount ignorance of the real situation – today, OOXML is the only lock in tool available to Microsoft – they protect Microsoft rather than protecting their users. In reality, they are enemies of their own users, as they use Microsoft handcuffs to prevent them to own and control their intellectual property.

Unfortunately, the absolute majority of office suite users are not aware of the issues – for their intellectual property – related to the closed and proprietary Microsoft office document format, and are just victim of the irresponsible choice about the native document format made by developers of OnlyOffice and WPS Office, and the likes.

Of course, given Microsoft monopoly on office suites, programs must support OOXML to their best, as LibreOffice does, to “steal” Microsoft stronghold on intellectual property, and give it back to legitimate owners, i.e. users of Microsoft office series suites, whatever the name, and of their accomplishes.

While I was trying to explain all this with my blog posts about ODF, something unexpected happened: several journalists picked up the contents of the articles and relaunched them on their media, showing that there is still hope for a sane attitude about document formats, rather than the current “comfortable” behaviour of choosing the most frequently used document format without even thinking to the consequences of the evil strategy associated to it.

Based on this unexpected – and extremely positive – outcome, I have decided to revive the ODF Advocacy project (which was killed twice in the past) by launching ODF News (https://www.odf.news), where I will write about ODF and publish ODF supporting documents.

ODF News will go live in January 2026, to prepare for the 20th anniversary of ODF being approved as ISO/IEC 26300.

The Document Foundation announces the approval of the Open Document Format (ODF) v1.4 standard by OASIS Open

ODF 1.4 Approved as Oasis Open StandardThis new version of the native LibreOffice document format standard marks the 20th anniversary of the only open document format for office applications

Berlin, December 3, 2025 – The Document Foundation announces that OASIS Open (www.oasis-open.org), the global open-source and standards organisation, has approved the Open Document Format (ODF) for office applications v1.4 as an OASIS standard, which is the organisation’s highest level of ratification.

The release of ODF v1.4 coincides with the 20th anniversary of ODF’s adoption as an OASIS Standard. Since 2005, ODF has served users as a vendor-neutral, royalty-free format for office documents, ensuring that files remain readable, editable and interoperable across platforms.

Several governments and international organisations, including NATO, the European Commission and countries across multiple continents, have mandated ODF for their operations worldwide.

ODF v1.4 maintains full backward compatibility and improves developer documentation, adds better support for assistive technologies for accessibility, improves professional document formatting and visual design capabilities, and expands features for data analysis and technical documentation. These updates reinforce the Open Document Format’s position as a comprehensive solution for office productivity and document creation.

“ODF provides a vendor-neutral foundation for office productivity and collaboration. With v1.4, the standard continues to evolve, supporting cloud collaboration, richer multimedia, and standardised security,” said Svante Schubert, Open Document Format’s TC Co-Chair. “Looking ahead, ODF is moving beyond document exchange towards standardised, semantic, change-based collaboration, enabling the meaningful sharing of interoperable changes across platforms.”

ODF v1.4 safeguards digital sovereignty by removing a single vendor’s control over documents and returning it to the community, to allows individuals and enterprises to independently decide how and with whom to share content, preventing it from being analysed for commercial purposes or potentially shared without the legitimate owner’s knowledge.
Like all other versions of the standard format, ODF 1.4 is based on an XML schema that complies with simplicity and readability guidelines, making files much more robust and secure than those commonly found on the market.

Overall, this is another significant step towards transparency, openness and digital sovereignty, thanks to the collaborative efforts of open-source software developers, advocates and users.
The finalized four-part specification of ODF v1.4 can be found in the OASIS library by clicking here: docs.oasis-open.org/office/OpenDocument/v1.4/os/.

The announcement mentions OASIS sponsors who have not contributed to the development of ODF 1.4, whereas The Document Foundation, which funded the development of the standard alongside companies such as Microsoft and has always advocated for it, is not mentioned at all. Unfortunately, business is business, even when it comes to open standards.

ODF 1.4 New Features

General

  • The writing direction specification has been expanded and clarified.
  • Complex backgrounds, such as colour gradients or hatching, can now be applied to a wider range of objects.
  • Objects can be marked as “decorative” to support accessibility technologies.
  • Shapes can now contain not only simple text and lists, but also tables.
  • The method for specifying the handles of shapes has been improved.
  • A new, more flexible method has been added for specifying the format of number labels in multi-level lists.

Text Documents

  • It is now possible to position objects relative to the page margins.
  • A binding area (also known as a gutter) can be set in the page format.
  • The overlay behaviour of objects can now be specified more flexibly.

Spreadsheets

  • A new function, EASTERSUNDAY, can be used to calculate the date of Easter and its associated dates.
  • Text colour and cell background colour can be used as filter criteria.

Charts

  • Scales can be labelled more flexibly.
  • For logarithmic scales, the underlying base can be specified.

Formula Typesetting

  • All versions of the MathML formula language are now permitted.

The Role of ODF in Digital Identity and Authentication

Reliable data flows, verifiable signatures and predictable structures are essential for digital identity systems, which touch every aspect of modern digital life. They authorise transactions, confirm requests and guarantee security policies.

In this context, the Open Document Format (ODF) offers a transparent, computer-readable foundation for verifying the authenticity of documents and ensuring their long-term integrity.

Each ODF file is a structured ZIP container with a consistent internal layout. It contains a set of XML files that are always located in the same position. These files include meta.xml for metadata, manifest.xml for the list of files and relationships, content.xml for document data and styles.xml for presentation rules. The files are either ODT (text), ODS (spreadsheets), ODP (presentations) or ODG (drawings).

Because everything is in XML format and in the same location, identity systems can analyse the content without searching for it as they would with OOXML files, which vary greatly depending on the application used to create them. Identity systems can therefore focus on specific parts of a file rather than scanning raw binary blocks, which are present in OOXML files.

This is important for signing, integrity validation, metadata extraction and policy enforcement. When documents move from one identity platform to another, APIs can map ODF elements in a stable manner, reducing ambiguity and improving verification speed.

Document Signing

ODF supports the XML Signature and XML Encryption standards via the META-INF/documentsignatures.xml file. This file can contain multiple independent signatures, each relating to specific parts of the document. The signature refers to an explicit path within the ZIP container, making automatic verification easier and avoiding confusion caused by false errors resulting from layout changes.

Each document can contain user signatures, organisational seals, timestamps, and workflow attestations. Each signature can also contain its own certificate chain, revocation information, and policies.

ODF is compatible with standard X.509 certificates, enabling the use of national eIDAS identification systems and corporate PKI systems. Verification pipelines can apply the same trust rules used for signed emails or encrypted communications.

Interoperability and Identity Federation

Digital identity works best when it is portable. ODF’s openness supports this by avoiding vendor-specific binary constructs. Any identity framework can be integrated with ODF because its schema is public and stable, its structure is predictable, and there are no proprietary validators.

In federated identity ecosystems, such as cross-border government services or multi-cloud enterprise configurations, ODF reduces friction and ensures that documents remain compatible, even when authentication systems differ.

Long-Term Signature Validation and Archival Use

In some cases, identity systems must verify a document signed many years earlier, which requires long-term validation. ODF supports long-term authentication because its XML structure is future-proof: it can store timestamps, revocation data and certificate chains, and it avoids vendor-specific cryptographic formats.

In legal, regulatory and archival contexts, this aspect is more important than speed. Formats that rely on proprietary rendering engines risk becoming unreadable over time, whereas ODF remains readable, even many years later.

ODF in Zero Trust Workflows

In Zero Trust architectures, every resource must be verified at every stage. The structure of ODF fits perfectly into this model. Automated systems can verify the following: certificate validity, signature integrity, metadata trust levels, and the consistency of internal component hashes

As ODF exposes everything via XML, identity engines can apply consistent rules without performing custom analysis, thereby reducing attack surfaces and simplifying compliance.

The Evolution of ODF into the Future

Technical opportunities include using more powerful predefined hash algorithms, adopting JSON-based metadata levels, providing native support for verifiable credentials, and creating standardised profiles for government identity systems.

Given the growth of digital identity frameworks, ODF is the optimal format for documents requiring both authentication and additional security features.

The role of ODF in digital sovereignty (digital freedom)

Digital sovereignty, or the ability of nations, organisations and individuals to control their own digital destiny, is a fundamental issue of the 21st century. At the heart of this challenge lies a seemingly trivial question: who controls the format of the documents that contain our intellectual property or personal information?

In this context, the standard and open Open Document Format (ODF) – the native format of LibreOffice documents, also supported by other suites – is the fundamental technology for those seeking true digital independence.

Digital sovereignty includes the ability to control access to one’s own information without depending on third parties, to make independent technological choices based on one’s own needs, to ensure independent access to strategic data without depending on the commercial interests of Big Tech, and to maintain this technological self-determination in the face of market consolidation.

When government agencies, businesses, or citizens store their documents in proprietary formats controlled by Big Tech, they surrender part of their sovereignty and depend on these external entities to access their own information.

Why document formats are important for sovereignty

Document formats are infrastructure, which—like roads, power grids, or telecommunications networks—are fundamental to the functioning of modern societies. Consider what happens when strategic documents exist only in formats controlled by a single vendor:

  • Vendor Lock-In: Organisations find themselves trapped, unable to switch to alternative software without costly conversion processes and potential data loss.
  • Loss of Control: formats can and do change without notice and beyond the control of users, increasing the effect of vendor lock-in.
  • Fragility of Access: if the vendor controlling the format changes the format or discontinues support, as was the case with Windows 10, access to documents becomes problematic or impossible.
  • Economic Dependency: The cost of the licence required to perform software updates creates a relationship of economic dependency in order to access one’s own data, and effectively transfers ownership of the data to the vendor that controls the format.

Why ODF is the only tool for digital sovereignty

ODF is governed by OASIS, an international standardisation organisation that protects its transparent development, and is published as ISO/IEC 26300-2015 (and soon ISO/IEC 26300-2025). Unlike proprietary formats, ODF specifications are public and can be freely implemented, are developed through a transparent, multi-stakeholder process, are not controlled by a single government or company, and are subject to international standardisation bodies.

This means that governments and companies can participate in defining the format specifications, rather than being forced to passively accept changes imposed by a single vendor based on its commercial strategies.

Thus, ODF specifications allow anyone to create an office suite that natively supports the format and promotes digital sovereignty, without any authorisation, licence fees or fear of legal action, while supporting the local software industry.

ODF enables true interoperability, not only between different software packages, but also between countries, languages and political systems. A document created in Brazil can be opened and edited in India, Germany or Japan using locally developed software. This breaks down digital barriers and enables the creation of diverse, independent technology ecosystems.

A stack for digital sovereignty

Digital sovereignty requires a multi-layered infrastructure, starting with the ODF open standard format to ensure format independence, moving on to an open source office suite such as LibreOffice to have control over the tool, an open source cloud infrastructure such as Nextcloud to have control over the location of the data, and ending with a legislative framework that defines the requirements for sovereignty.

ODF is at the base of the stack because without an open standard for document format, digital sovereignty is still limited, even with elements such as a law favouring open source software, an open source cloud infrastructure, and an open source office suite.

Challenges for adopting the ODF format

Adopting the open standard ODF format for digital sovereignty is not without its challenges, for several reasons:

  • Migration from proprietary formats requires planning, training and, in many cases, managing interoperability issues due to unnecessary complexities artificially built into the proprietary format.
  • When stakeholders in the organisation continue to use the proprietary format, exchanging documents in ODF format can create interoperability issues, as office suites that do not use ODF as their native format have problems handling ODF files appropriately.
  • Implementing policies focused on digital sovereignty requires a clear commitment from management, which must prioritise long-term independence over short-term convenience.

However, all of these challenges can be managed and tend to diminish over time, while the constraints and costs of dependence on proprietary formats become increasingly severe.

Long-term archiving with ODF: a future-proof strategy

Digital documents in proprietary formats often become inaccessible within a few years due to undocumented changes to the XML schema that are intentionally employed for lock-in purposes. To avoid this problem, it is advisable to use the Open Document Format (ODF) not only for everyday tasks, but also for long-term storage. This ensures that documents remain accessible for years or even generations.

Without this approach, government documents, academic research, legal documents and corporate archives risk becoming true digital orphans — files that exist, but cannot be read. This is not so much because the software that created them is obsolete, but because the XML schema has been modified to make the files readable by a specific version of a single software program. However, the layering of changes makes them unreadable by any software in the long term.

Why is ODF suitable for archiving?

ODF (ISO/IEC 26300 and subsequent versions) is an open standard, managed transparently by OASIS. Its development process and specifications are documented and publicly accessible, unlike proprietary formats, where the process is undocumented and the ISO/IEC specifications do not reflect the reality of the format. This means that even if the current software disappeared, developers could create new programmes compatible with the standard to handle the files and access their content.

Furthermore, ODF files are compressed archives (ZIP) containing XML files based on a schema that can be easily read by non-technical users, enabling anyone to extract and interpret the content. This transparency of format is a fundamental element of its archival value. In contrast, the XML schema of proprietary files is intentionally designed to be unreadable. In this sense, it is a perfect example of how a language created for simplification, such as XML, can become a subtle lock-in tool if used contrary to its nature.

Finally, ODF maintains strong backwards compatibility between versions. This means that all files created with ODF 1.0 in 2005 — immediately after standardisation by OASIS — can be opened without issue by applications released in 2025. This stability is intentional; the format was designed with long-term preservation in mind.

Best practices for archiving in the ODF format

Although newer versions add functionality, the best option for long-term archiving is to use a version recognised by ISO/IEC, such as ODF 1.2 (ISO/IEC 26300-1:2015) or, in the near future, ODF 1.3 (ISO/IEC 26300:2025). This is because it is mature and well documented, and will remain compatible for decades, offering an excellent balance between functionality and breadth of support.

For documents where faithful visual reproduction is important, it is advisable to embed fonts in ODF files to avoid font substitution issues when files are opened years later in a different environment to the one used to create them.

Additionally, all resources related to the documents (images, graphics, etc.) should be embedded in the ODF file rather than linked externally because external links are at risk of breaking over time if the original file is moved, which could render the documents incomplete.

Finally, to enable recognition of the file years later, take advantage of rich metadata support by adding the creation date, author, subject, and any other contextual information that could help understand the document’s purpose and origin. In any case, even when using an open standard format such as ODF for long-term archiving, it is advisable to plan for the periodic migration of archives to the most recent version of the format, and to check the accessibility of files every few years.

ODF, though, cannot be used to archive documents which have to maintain their original format, without the risk of being inadvertently edited. For these documents, a different approach based on PDF/A should be considered. PDF/A is specifically designed for archiving and complements ODF perfectly in a comprehensive archiving strategy, so is ideal for final documents that are not expected to be modified over time.

Since no format can protect against media failure, it is best to keep multiple copies of each file on different storage media and in different locations, following the 3-2-1 backup rule: three copies on two types of media, with one copy off-site. In addition, the archiving processes should be documented and the documentation should be easily accessible, so that people taking on different roles within the company can reproduce and update the process in a manner consistent with the software tools used, as well as with decisions on strategy and formats.

Looking to the future

The digital preservation landscape continues to evolve, but ODF’s commitment to open standards, transparency and vendor independence positions it as the best long-term choice, thanks to its dedication to ensuring information accessibility extends beyond the lifespan of a single organisation.

In a world where planned obsolescence is an increasingly common strategy and is sometimes imposed, as with the end of support for Windows 10 forcing the abandonment of perfectly functioning hardware despite any talk of sustainability and reducing digital waste, this commitment is rare and valuable.