decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
MS and XML - The Steamroller Pushes Ahead
Monday, April 11 2005 @ 10:10 AM EDT

Of course, it had to happen. Microsoft is crowing about Massachusetts allowing their XML to be called Open Format:

Organizations of all stripes, from healthcare and financial services to manufacturing and legal services, are embracing XML support in Microsoft Office to exchange data among heterogeneous systems, platforms and applications. And nowhere is this trend more evident than in government. Just last month, for instance, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, in issuing a policy to use "open format" software, endorsed XML schemas such as Microsoft Office's WordprocessingML for helping to achieve data interoperability in public-sector IT systems. Such confirmation sounds a familiar theme -- the European Union and Denmark last year recognized that the use of open-document formats such as WordprocessingML greatly improve interoperability.

Jean Paoli, Microsoft's senior director of XML architecture, is at the Gilbane Conference on Content Management Technologies. He is "one of the co-creators of the XML 1.0 standard with the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)", and he's debating today Tim Bray, director of Web Technologies at Sun, and John Udell, lead analyst at InfoWorld, in the keynote debate, "Microsoft & Sun: What is the Right XML Strategy for Information Interchange?"

I have an idea. How about neither of them gets to pick the winner? How about someone who has no financial stake in the outcome gets to choose? And no bribes allowed. How would that be?

Refreshing, for starters.

Incidentally, if you are looking to migrate from Windows to Linux, here's a fine roadmap. If you wish to leave Solaris for Linux, here are some tools.

Microsoft has one of their phony PR interviews with itself, in which it asks employee Paoli some questions about government use of their proprietary XML:

PressPass: How are governments embracing XML?

Paoli: On March 25, Massachusetts issued an open-format policy (www.mass.gov/itd/etrmversion3/techrefmodelv3.htm) that includes the Office XML file format in the commonwealth's list of accepted formats for creating and archiving government documents. We are extremely pleased that these new scenarios that are enabled by XML and Office can serve e-government needs such as those of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

In addition, the Danish government last year sanctioned the Office 2003 XML reference schemas for its infrastructure database as an open document format that is suitable for the needs of various government organizations. And the European Union also noted last year that the Office 2003 reference schemas and our support for customer-defined schemas had greatly improved the potential for interoperability of document processing.

XML is also integral to the United States Federal Enterprise architecture, and the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the E-Government Act of 2002 both actively endorse the technology. The OMB adopted a set of custom-defined schemas in XML, and then Microsoft partner BearingPoint worked closely with the OMB and Microsoft to develop a solution, based on an InfoPath 2003 form and the custom-defined schema, that provides the same look and feel as a government form that the OMB uses. So workers can populate documents with information based on this format and then send that information via e-mail or using Web services.

The Colorado Department of Agriculture, which used to rely on a manual, paper-based process for inspecting feed-commodity facilities, now uses a custom Office solution developed by Microsoft partner Bfirst Solutions that automates the data collection, analysis and notification process to maintain the integrity of the state's agricultural supply. Field agents record the results of their inspections using notebook computers and Microsoft InfoPath 2003 XML forms using custom-defined schema that details the data collection in the XML structure, and then they send that information in an XML form to the Colorado Department of Agriculture. The result is a more efficient system that collects field data with greater accuracy and ensures more timely notification and response to potential threats to public safety.

And the United Nations' Economic Commission for Europe has been working on an XML project, called UNeDocs (United Nations Extensions for aligned electronic trade documents), to draft XML-based electronic documents that are equivalent to paper trade documents and based on existing Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) standards. Because EDI is an expensive technology, its use has been relegated largely to enterprises that can afford it, but XML promises to make the electronic exchange of business documents more affordable for smaller organizations. Microsoft has been working with the United Nations to develop InfoPath XML forms that support their custom-defined schema.

So there you have the plan, Stan. Here's the UNeDocs project, if you want to look at what they are doing. They define UNeDocs like this, in their whitepaper:

UNeDocs aims to become the world electronic trade document standard under UN auspices and will be developed into an official UN/CEFACT standard.

UNeDocs is a simple and low cost answer for the exchange of document-based data. It incorporates international standards for efficient and secure trade.

UNeDocs has been designed to provide a migration from paper to paperless trade and letting small and medium enterprises in developed and developing countries to participate in advanced supply chains.

By using UNeDocs documents, traders and Governments adhere to international trade standards and best business practices.

UNeDocs is built upon the United Nations Layout key, the world standard for International trade documents in paper format. UNeDocs documents incorporate UN/CEFACT trade facilitation recommendations and electronic business standards.

UNeDocs documents can be generated in paper, XML, PDF and EDI format, thus delivering a powerful migration tool from a paper to a paper-less environment.

Key documents for trade (invoice, custom declaration, shipping instruction, forwarding instruction, . . . ) are implemented in UNeDocs. UNeDocs documents can be adapted to take into account specific country/industry requirements.

UNeDocs is an open and technology-neutral solution that can be easily implemented by SMEs and large companies alike. UNeDocs documents can be visualized using a standard Internet browser or can be implemented in standard office software.

UNeDocs has been developed by UNECE. UNECE's mission is to support the development of standards, tools and recommednations designed to facilitate the development of trade and to promote their implementation in UNECE member countries, with special emphasis in transition economies.

Here's my question. Can a country that has chosen Free and Open Source Software, like Brazil, participate easily and freely? Before you answer, here's the Microsoft footprint. However, in fairness, so far as I can see, the copyright notice allows source modification and distribution. The project says: "The United Nations provides the UNeDocs.InfoPath documentation and sources under a license free of charge." So far, I haven't been able to find the license. Gold star to whoever finds it first. (You don't suppose they mean Microsoft's icky XML Reference Schema Patent License, do you? Can't be, unless we want to start defining some terms, like "free".) However, on page 11 of their PDF on their UNeDocs InfoPath specs, we find this:

3.6. .Net Platform UNeDocs.InfoPath uses .NET framework as its managed code for scripting, which helps to integrate with organizations’ databases and servers. With Visual Basic.net, UNeDocs.InfoPath leverages full advantage of .NET framework with easy integration to enterprise solutions like web services, SQL Server, Biz-talk server, etc.

You can see the forms they have come up with here. What I'd do, if I were a conscienceless corporation willing to do any dirty thing to win in the marketplace, is coopt standards so that it is just too hard to leave my products. And if I were on the other side, I'd be researching every standards body on the planet and banging on their doors, making sure they understand the issues the FOSS community has and ensuring that there is an even playing field. Otherwise, the game will be over before we even know it's being played. I had never even heard of UNeDocs until today. That's not good.

UPDATE: Icebarron foung this paper with some background information on Sun, XML and the UBL initiative.


  


MS and XML - The Steamroller Pushes Ahead | 98 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corrections here, please...
Authored by: jbeadle on Monday, April 11 2005 @ 11:16 AM EDT
...so PJ can find 'em easily.

Thanks,
-jb

[ Reply to This | # ]

MS and XML - The Steamroller Pushes Ahead- Found Copyright notice
Authored by: nhorman on Monday, April 11 2005 @ 11:17 AM EDT
The copyright notice for the UNeDocs document set appears in a popup from this
link:
http://www.unece.org/etrades/unedocs/V04/index.htm

[ Reply to This | # ]

Corrections Here
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 11 2005 @ 11:17 AM EDT
.

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT, other links here, please…
Authored by: jbeadle on Monday, April 11 2005 @ 11:18 AM EDT
Please make links clickable, like so:

<a href="http://www.example.com">your words here</a>

And use post mode = HTML formatted.

Thanks,
-jb

[ Reply to This | # ]

Copyright Notice for UNeDocs.Infopath
Authored by: droth on Monday, April 11 2005 @ 11:25 AM EDT
http://www.unece.org/e trades/unedocs/copyright.htm
Note that there are multiple implementations of the UNeDocs spec. It looks like Microsoft and Adobe each have one at the moment. The Adobe one is implemented as interactive PDFs (PDFs with forms, basically) and the Microsoft one is called Infopath. I haven't read the copyright notice yet, so I'm not sure if it applies to all UNeDocs or just UNeDocs.Infopath.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Is our generation more greedy?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 11 2005 @ 11:28 AM EDT
I remember lots of stories about the discovery of Insulin & Medicines being invented before the 2nd world war. It always seemed that the inventors turned the patents over to the world at large. (Is that just my perception?) Is it impossible for the richest company in the world to GIVE a data format to the United nations, without strings, or obligations. I know there are business interests but we're talking about a file structure not someone's testicle! S

[ Reply to This | # ]

Migration Roadmap - MacOS X to Linux
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 11 2005 @ 11:29 AM EDT
Afterall, Apple has been a far more evil company than even Sun, especially when
it comes to patents.

[ Reply to This | # ]

UNeDocs Main Page
Authored by: lawyers_son on Monday, April 11 2005 @ 11:32 AM EDT

Here is the UNeDocs Main page for anyone unfamiliar with it:
HERE

This link may be of interest:
Microsoft Infopath solution for UNeDocs IDS v0.4

[ Reply to This | # ]

I's a little premature ...
Authored by: rsi on Monday, April 11 2005 @ 11:41 AM EDT
for Mickey$oft to be making this statement (Big Surprise!) since the request for
comments has just ended, and Massachusetts needs time to review these comments
before making this official. IMHO, this isn't over yet! Hopefully,
Massachusetts will realize their mistake.

[ Reply to This | # ]

UNeDocs FAQ page.
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 11 2005 @ 12:23 PM EDT

What is UNeDocs?
Who is driving UNeDocs?
Why UN? Can’t the private sector develop electronic trade documents?
Why UN? Can’t the private sector develop electronic trade documents?
What is the advantage of electronic trade documents?
How will the UN create the UNeDocs document definitions?
What is a UNedocs document definition?
What is the UNeDocs Demonstrator?
Is UNeDocs a solution for SMEs, developing countries and transitional economies?
So UNeDocs is not of interest for large companies?
What is the relation between UNeDocs and XML?
What is XML anyhow?
But currently there is no recognized EDI standard for XML, is it?
How can I learn more about UNeDocs?

FAQ Link

Brian S.

[ Reply to This | # ]

UNeDocs UK. - SITPRO
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 11 2005 @ 12:58 PM EDT

UNeDocs UK

Currently under development, UNeDocs UK is a developers' toolkit incorporating the components of TOPFORM, ElecTra and WebElecTra, with the addition of data models, core-component specifications, UNTDED (United Nations Trade Data Elements Directory) and code lists. For further information about this project, please contact or Sue Bravery at SITPRO.......... Link

Looking around their site:

Communication Strategy Group

The Communications Strategy Group's task is to establish a strategy and coherent approach to SITPRO's external interfaces (business and Government) and to enhance its external visibility. In addition to members of SITPRO's staff the CSG is made up of representatives from various organisations including publishers from the field of international trade and leading trade organisations.

On this page they have a link to their members. It requires a password. These people are secret.

SITPRO is not an "OPEN" organisation.

They should be checked out

Brian S.

[ Reply to This | # ]

MS Infopath web site link
Authored by: marbux on Monday, April 11 2005 @ 01:01 PM EDT
MS Infopath web site

---
Retired lawyer

[ Reply to This | # ]

International agencies coopted by corporations
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 11 2005 @ 01:27 PM EDT

What I'd do, if I were a conscienceless corporation willing to do any dirty thing to win in the marketplace, is coopt standards so that it is just too hard to leave my products.

Good point. The corporations are attempting to coopt international organisations in order to bestow upon themselves a stamp of credibility, I think. UN eDocs is one. And WIPO (and its national cohorts) is another. WIPO seems to have bought the mindless corporate mantra of 'all ideas are intellectual property - intellectual property is good - intellectual property encourages innovation' without question. In my opinion these organisations should be leading all inclusive discussions about realistic definitions of intellectual property and open standards instead of mindlessly delivering the agendas crafted by the corporate world.

Alas, these international bureaucracies seem to be, like the corporations they represent, more interested in promoting their self interests and those of their sponsors than promoting the true interests of humanity.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Two questions...
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 11 2005 @ 01:47 PM EDT
1) What is to stop M$ from wresting the standard and creating a new monopoly?
Will XML's adoption as a free standard force M$ to keep the free and open?

2) Wasn't Mono supposed to be the FOSS answer to .NET?

[ Reply to This | # ]

MS and XML - The Steamroller Pushes Ahead
Authored by: geoff lane on Monday, April 11 2005 @ 03:54 PM EDT
I've long argued that FOSS should develop and publish their own standards documents - it worked well with PNG. The existing standards development systems are dominated by commercial interests and it's both expensive and a time destroying process to get involved.

XML isn't that wonderful. It's got a lot of historical baggage from it's SMGL roots that we are stuck with and any standards process will not clean out the dross. If it were possible to start from scratch a much cleaner standard could be developed.

While we are in the position of following standards developed by others we will always be playing catchup; if we can be leaders in the process it will become much fairer.

---
I'm not a Windows user, consequently I'm not
afraid of receiving email from total strangers.

[ Reply to This | # ]

wasn't *msft* saying it's XML was open source?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, April 11 2005 @ 04:23 PM EDT
This is going back about two years. But I think msft's whole BFD (at least in
marketing hype) about using XML is that msft's file format would now be an open
standard.

Msft was getting a lot of critism for their closed file format standards at the
time, this was msft's answer.

Or maybe I'm missing something?

- walterbyrd

[ Reply to This | # ]

SW Patents are NOT internationally recognized
Authored by: MyPersonalOpinio on Monday, April 11 2005 @ 05:10 PM EDT

>Can a country that has chosen Free and Open Source Software, like Brazil, participate easily and freely?

As long as they don't pass legislation allowing Software Patents the answer is yes, whatever patents "protect" these things they won't apply in that country.

Maybe it is not bad... In all, it may be a way to discourage countries from approving Software Patents legislation

[ Reply to This | # ]

MS and XML - and Edifix 5.0
Authored by: bbaston on Monday, April 11 2005 @ 05:51 PM EDT
Please pursue the following more deeply, as I've not developed an understanding of every approach to utilizing this European Gift to the United Nations. To READ the data requires Edifix 5.0, which is a "free" reader for MICROSOFT ONLY. To download Edifix Reader, one must fill out a form giving name, company, postal address, and email address with an apparent opt out for future contacts by the marketers of Edifix.

To prepare a form for use, one must purchase a full product from the company.

So, this open format appears tied to proprietary operating system (Windows) and proprietor of the openness (Edifix).

---
Ben
-------------
IMBW, IANAL2, IMHO, IAVO,
imaybewrong, iamnotalawyertoo, inmyhumbleopinion, iamveryold.
-+++->> Have you donated to Groklaw this month?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Use of XML for word processing formats should not be patentable
Authored by: karl on Tuesday, April 12 2005 @ 12:17 AM EDT
If you think about it, XML is very close to SGML, which was originally defined
specifically as a format for document markup. The idea that doing document
markup in XML is some sort of new and unique and protectable innovation is
ludicrous.

[ Reply to This | # ]

What you are, madam, is clear. We are merely haggling over price.
Authored by: jbn on Wednesday, April 13 2005 @ 01:57 AM EDT
We all know about the slush fund Microsoft has to pick up the tab for operations
like these--give some large licensee some cheap or free seats and they'll make
it up on the back-end when Microsoft charges them for new versions of the
software that fix bugs or add new features.

So, just out of curiosity, how cheap are the proprietary Microsoft program
licenses the state of MA is getting in exchange for caving in on their
"open format" idea?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )