You may find the following link useful. Not so much for the obvious explanation, but more for the background :-
https://www.howtogeek.com/304622/what-is-a-.docx-file-and-how-is-it-diff erent-from-a-.doc-file-in-microsoft-word/
Personally, I think it is a cynical attempt to keep one step ahead of an 'Open' format, in order to keep the world hooked on MS Office and the spiralling costs. But then I also see Microsoft as a 'single point of failure' for the world. However, the NHS came close to something like that recently. I wonder where the bug came from ?
Best regards,
Noel XorSyst
-----Original Message----- From: main [mailto:main-bounces@lists.alug.org.uk] On Behalf Of Phil Thane Sent: Monday, June 12, 2017 6:31 PM To: main@lists.alug.org.uk Subject: [ALUG] MS Office file formats
I've used Star Office / Open Office / Libre Office for all my writing work since around 2000. Most editors though want work in MS file formats, previously .doc, now .docx. I notice that Libre Office 5 'save as' function gives me the option to save in MS Word 2007 - 2013 XML (docx). Does anyone know if that's the latest? What does the new-fangled 'MS Office as a Service' use? Are we going to run into compatibility issues all over again?
-- Phil Thane
www.pthane.co.uk phil@pthane.co.uk 01767 449759 07582 750607 Twitter @pthane
_______________________________________________ main@lists.alug.org.uk http://www.alug.org.uk/ https://lists.alug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/main Unsubscribe? See message headers or the web site above!
On 13 June 2017 at 11:50, Noel Galer noel@abasys.co.uk wrote:
Personally, I think it is a cynical attempt to keep one step ahead of an 'Open' format, in order to keep the world hooked on MS Office and the spiralling costs.
It wasn't so much cynical as blatant (not that the two are mutually exclusive). From memory parts of the spec basically define behaviour as "doing what Word does", and large parts of the .docx are just binary blobs that are no more open than .doc was. As I recall MS had to buy their way onto standards bodies to influence the standardisation process?
.odf is a much better format but it wasn't designed by Microsoft for Microsoft's purposes so wasn't "suitable". Office is, basically, the Microsoft cash cow and far more important to it that Windows I think. Not that I have a problem with MS behaving in its own interest, I do however have a problem with the rest of the world letting them get away with it...
But in answer to Phil's OP, as I understand it Office 2013 XML is the latest format and is the one you should be using for your purposes. Note that compatibility is OK but not perfect (and the same is true between Office versions, so that points to failings in the spec rather than the implementations). I think that .odf is better although last I checked the MS Office implementation of .odf was pretty poor.
In truth there isn't one good office document format that is really good for interoperability. PDF is better unless the recipient needs to edit it, in which case unfortunately using the same software as the recipient is the only reliable option. But I haven't had Office for years now and get on fine with LibreOffice (sharing docs with other people who use various other word processors).
Mark
-
Mark Rogers -
Noel Galer