<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wikidot="http://www.wikidot.com/rss-namespace">

	<channel>
		<title>The preferred document exchange among European Institutions is OOXML</title>
		<link>http://noooxml.wikidot.com/forum/t-422868/the-preferred-document-exchange-among-european-institutions</link>
		<description>Posts in the discussion thread &quot;The preferred document exchange among European Institutions is OOXML&quot; - &quot;The preferred document exchange among European Institutions is OOXML&quot;, this is the summary of an awful document produced by the &quot;Inter-Institutional Committee for Informatics&quot; of the European Institutions. Basically the document says that European bureaucrats use Microsoft Office everywhere on their desktop, and this is not gonna change.</description>
				<copyright></copyright>
		<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2026 00:05:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		
					<item>
				<guid>http://noooxml.wikidot.com/forum/t-422868#post-1333531</guid>
				<title>The preferred document exchange among European Institutions is OOXML</title>
				<link>http://noooxml.wikidot.com/forum/t-422868/the-preferred-document-exchange-among-european-institutions#post-1333531</link>
				<description></description>
				<pubDate>Thu, 22 Dec 2011 19:45:07 +0000</pubDate>
				<wikidot:authorName>zoobab</wikidot:authorName>				<wikidot:authorUserId>2946</wikidot:authorUserId>				<content:encoded>
					<![CDATA[
						 <p>&quot;The preferred document exchange among European Institutions is OOXML&quot;, this is the summary of an <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/informatics/oss_tech/pdf/2011-07-25_ares.pdf">awful document</a> produced by the &quot;Inter-Institutional Committee for Informatics&quot; of the European Institutions. Basically the document says that European bureaucrats use Microsoft Office everywhere on their desktop, and this is not gonna change. Here is the document in full:</p> <blockquote> <p>Ref. Ares(2011)808658 - 25/07/2011</p> <p>Inter-Institutional Committee for Informatics</p> <p>Conclusions on document exchange<br /> formats following the discussion on office<br /> automation platforms</p> <p>The mandate of the Inter-Institutional Committee for Informatics (hereafter “CII”)<br /> includes, on the one hand, the exchange of information about the IT policies of the<br /> Institutions represented in it (hereafter “the Institutions”) and, on the other hand, the<br /> identification and encouragement of potential areas of synergy.<br /> In this context, during its meeting held in Brussels on 14 December 2010, the CII held a<br /> discussion about the current situation of, and the future strategies for, the office<br /> automation platforms used by the Institutions, based on a survey distributed ahead of the<br /> meeting and filled in by all the Institutions as well as by 15 additional EU Agencies<br /> (hereafter “the survey”).<br /> In addition, in order to initiate and facilitate the discussion, the Commission delivered a<br /> presentation of its project “Next Office Automation Platform” (NOAP).<br /> The main findings of the survey were the following:</p> <p>(1) At present, the <strong>EU institutions typically run Microsoft-based solutions on the<br /> corporate desktop</strong>, as their office productivity suite, on the e-mail platform side,<br /> and on the collaborative platform, although diversity is certainly higher in the<br /> latter.</p> <p>(2) All respondents indicated their expectation <strong>to remain on Microsoft-based<br /> platforms in the office automation realms mentioned above for the foreseeable<br /> future (i.e. for the 2 years to come)</strong>.</p> <p>(3) The revisable document formats used at present are <strong>mostly Office 2002/2003<br /> formats (84% of replies)</strong>. The expected <strong>prevailing document format for the future<br /> is Office Open XML (68% of replies)</strong>.</p> <p>(4) The Internet browser offering is already diversified at present, with a strong OSS<br /> presence (Firefox) alongside Microsoft's Internet Explorer browser, and this<br /> offering will become increasingly diversified in the years to come.</p> <p>The discussion showed the following:<br /> – A decision is due on what how revisable document exchange format should evolve in<br /> the future. Indeed, Microsoft Office 2003 with Office 97 compatibility, the format<br /> currently used for inter-institutional exchanges, as well as the most widely used<br /> internally in the Institutions, is outdated.<br /> – Standards have since been adopted by standardisation bodies in this area, as well as in<br /> the area of non-revisable document formats.</p> <p>– Irrespective of the migration intentions of each of the Institutions, there is now a high<br /> expectation both internally and externally that document exchange formats should be<br /> based on standards.<br /> Following the discussion held during the meeting, the Institutions agreed that a common<br /> approach to revisable and non-revisable document exchange formats was advisable.<br /> This common approach can be summarised as follows.</p> <p>1.<br /> Exchanges with the external world.</p> <p>1.1.<br /> As a general rule, non-revisable document formats should be preferred. In<br /> this area there are two standards, both of which are implemented by a large<br /> variety of viewing tools, including Open Source Software (OSS). The PDF<br /> (ISO/IEC 32000-1:2008) is a widely used official standard. However, for<br /> archiving purposes, the second standard PDF/A (ISO 19005-X) offers some<br /> advantages. It is recommended to use at least one of the two ISO standards<br /> for non-revisable document formats.</p> <p>1.2.<br /> In cases where documents have to be exchanged using revisable document<br /> formats, the principle to be applied by analogy is the same as when dealing<br /> with multilingualism. Citizens and the Institutions’ partners (e.g. Member<br /> States) should be put at the centre, and the Institutions should take all<br /> appropriate measures to be able to provide them with documents in the<br /> standard format of their choice.<br /> The minimum requirement is to support XML-based revisable document<br /> formats standardised by the International Organization for Standardization,<br /> namely:<br /> – Open Document Format for Office Applications, or ODF (ISO/IEC<br /> 26300:2006).<br /> – Office Open XML, or OOXML (ISO/IEC 29500:2008).<br /> In addition, the Institutions are encouraged to support, on a best effort basis,<br /> other widely used document formats.<br /> Whenever multiple formats are supported, equal quality may not be<br /> guaranteed.</p> <p>2.<br /> Interinstitutional exchanges.<br /> 2.1.</p> <p>As far as non-revisable document formats are concerned, there is no<br /> reason to depart from the format recommended for exchanges with the<br /> external world. Therefore it is recommended to use at least one of the two<br /> ISO standards (ISO/IEC 32000-1:2008 or ISO 19005-X).</p> <p>2.2.<br /> As far as revisable document formats are concerned, XML-based<br /> international standards are the preferred approach. Given the fact that:</p> <p>2<br /> – on the one hand, <strong>OOXML is much more widely used than ODF at the<br /> moment, and this situation is not likely to evolve in the foreseeable<br /> future</strong>; and<br /> – on the other hand, all the Institutions plan to migrate to office automation<br /> platforms which will produce XML files natively while providing 100%<br /> native <strong>support for legacy formats</strong> such as Office 2003,<br /> <strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">the preferred document exchange among the Institutions is OOXML</span></strong>.<br /> 2.3.</p> <p>The guidelines given above should not become an impediment for achieving<br /> even greater administrative efficiency through interinstitutional cooperation. In particular:<br /> – where, for legal or other purposes, a non-revisable document must be<br /> regarded as the official version, the Institutions should, where necessary,<br /> exchange also its revisable version;<br /> – where, for technical reasons, an Institution needs a revisable document in<br /> its native format, the originating Institution should provide it in that<br /> format, in addition to the official exchange format (if different);<br /> – where, for legal or other reasons, a closed group of users is established,<br /> specific arrangements can be made.</p> <p>The Institutions agreed to take the appropriate measures so that, at the end of their<br /> ongoing or future migration projects, they can implement this common approach in an<br /> efficient and fully synchronised manner.</p> </blockquote> 
				 	]]>
				</content:encoded>							</item>
				</channel>
</rss>