There is a lot of discussion about how Open XML and OpenDocument Format should move into the future, and how the current situation came to be. To me it is important that the standard that I work with fully defines the features that I can use. On this Microsoft had a few choices concerning OpenDocument Format, embrace it, extend it, or go the hard way and create a standard themselves.
Embrace
The notion of Microsoft being allowed to fully embrace OpenDocument Format is a lofty one. They were not welcome in the OASIS committee, clearly spoken out by Gary Edwards who was one member of the "2-member" committee.
"If Microsoft were to join the OASIS ODF TC today, seeking to adapt ODF to meet the legacy document-MSOffice features-line of business integration needs of their monopoly base, the TC would have to deal with the exact same issues as they have summarily rejected with current compatibility-interoperability-convergence discussions! There is no possible way anyone can claim that today's OASIS ODF TC would welcome Microsoft and make accommodating changes to the specification! No way!"
So that leaves out the embracing part. If Microsoft were to adopt ODF they cannot fully reflect the large body of documents already in existence, so that's a no-go in my opinion. According to an article on Linux World there is even world-wide legislation that mandates that conversions to XML need to have near perfect fidelity.
Extend
One of the options being presented is that Microsoft could extend OpenDocument Format to support their own feature-set. First of all, I feel that this goes against the idea of having a standard format in the first place. The reason why I am opposed to this option is that everyone will start adding features outside of those defined within the ISO standard. Document interoperability will be more difficult since everyone needs to look at the other's implementation.
On the notion of extending a format to serve proprietary needs, OpenDocument Format has got some worrying stories of its own. A document available on the OpenOffice.org website clearly indicates that their goal is not to support the format defined by ISO but to use their own extensions: (OOo stands for OpenOffice.org)
"The OASIS OpenDocument XML Format TC uses the OOo format that is used by OOo 1.0 / OOo 1.1.x / SO 6.0 / SO 7 as basis for its work. OASIS OpenDocument XML will be very similar to that format."
Very similar? That doesn't sound to good.
"The OOo and the OASIS OpenDocument XML formats are not compatible because the XML namespace URLs used in both formats to uniquely identify the files as either OOo or as OASIS Open Office files obviously have to be different. This for itself has the consequence that application prepared to read OOo file won't read OASIS Open Office file and vice versa."
Say what? OpenOffice files are not OpenDocument Format files according to the OASIS specification? Well how about that? If we all go extending a document format, how does that serve interoperability? I now need to read a spec, and then visit all applications that I want to interoperate with. I can see how this diminishes the size of the standard, you just don't put anything in there!
Extinguish, or, co-exist as I'd like to call it.
Personally I feel this one is the better. You can easily allow both formats to co-exist and evolve. Perhaps on a later date when emotion levels die down you can think about the next step, merging the formats. But right now it is easy to use converters and various other technologies to work with both formats without any hassle. This allows all the features to be clearly specified inside the standard, in Open XML's case in full, and with enterprise-readiness in mind.
Now to get OpenOffice to start working with ISO to get those files of them equal to the spec!