<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Imagine Think Create Share : OpenXML</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/carloshm/archive/tags/OpenXML/default.aspx</link><description>Tags: OpenXML</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>Rich Text Content Control and Custom XML Part</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/carloshm/archive/2007/07/28/rich-text-content-control-and-custom-xml-part.aspx</link><pubDate>Sun, 29 Jul 2007 00:44:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:4109586</guid><dc:creator>carloshm</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>http://blogs.msdn.com/carloshm/comments/4109586.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.msdn.com/carloshm/commentrss.aspx?PostID=4109586</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Maybe you have used the Word 2007 Content Control Toolkit, and after mapping a Rich Text Content Control with a XML node, you have noticed that it turns into a plain text content control. &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;This is something that Word 2007 Content Control Toolkit manages, as it is not expected behaviour of the current implemented version of content controls.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;You can check at &lt;A href="http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb226172.aspx"&gt;http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb226172.aspx&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;that the expected action would be a run-time error.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The same way when you map a XML node to a picture content control, it stores the base-64 binary representation; it would be great to include the rich text representation (Ecma 376) of the text.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Cheers!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=4109586" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/carloshm/archive/tags/Office+System/default.aspx">Office System</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/carloshm/archive/tags/OpenXML/default.aspx">OpenXML</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/carloshm/archive/tags/Word/default.aspx">Word</category></item><item><title>Office 2007 ODF - UOF Support</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/carloshm/archive/2007/05/22/office-2007-odf-uof-support.aspx</link><pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2007 18:40:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:2795274</guid><dc:creator>carloshm</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>http://blogs.msdn.com/carloshm/comments/2795274.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.msdn.com/carloshm/commentrss.aspx?PostID=2795274</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Maybe you have read about projects for supporting &lt;A class="" title="Uniform Office Format" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Office_Format" mce_href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Office_Format"&gt;UOF&lt;/A&gt;. Similar approach to the &lt;A class="" title=OpenDocument href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument" mce_href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument"&gt;ODF&lt;/A&gt; support. &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;You can check them at:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;UL&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;
&lt;DIV class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"&gt;&lt;A href="http://uof-translator.sourceforge.net/"&gt;&lt;FONT face=Calibri size=3&gt;http://uof-translator.sourceforge.net/&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;
&lt;LI&gt;
&lt;DIV class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"&gt;&lt;A href="http://odf-converter.sourceforge.net/"&gt;&lt;FONT face=Calibri size=3&gt;http://odf-converter.sourceforge.net/&lt;/FONT&gt;&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/UL&gt;
&lt;P&gt;What I wasn't aware of, is the study to &lt;A class="" title="Sun's McNealy Proposes Merging ODF with Chinese Counterpart" href="http://www.betanews.com/article/Suns_McNealy_Proposes_Merging_ODF_with_Chinese_Counterpart/1176923845" mce_href="http://www.betanews.com/article/Suns_McNealy_Proposes_Merging_ODF_with_Chinese_Counterpart/1176923845"&gt;merge both formats&lt;/A&gt;. I can extract some text from the article:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P nd="5"&gt;&lt;EM&gt;One reason has to do with the formats' allocation of their respective namespaces. The Lab described the UOF schema as being much more structured, replete, and flexible, while certain parts of the ODF schema seem more arbitrary.&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P nd="5"&gt;This seems a real example of a possible future evolution of the current ODF format, sort of anounce at &lt;A class="" title="Brian Jones: Open XML Formats" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/brian_jones/archive/2007/02/20/beyond-the-basics.aspx" mce_href="http://blogs.msdn.com/brian_jones/archive/2007/02/20/beyond-the-basics.aspx"&gt;Brian Jones blog&lt;/A&gt;. The conclusion was a conversor &lt;A href="http://odf-to-uof.sourceforge.net/overview.html"&gt;http://odf-to-uof.sourceforge.net/overview.html&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P nd="5"&gt;Cheers!&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P nd="5"&gt;P.S.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P nd="5"&gt;You can check the announcement at &lt;A href="http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2007/may07/05-20UOFODFPR.mspx?rss_fdn=Press%20Releases"&gt;http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2007/may07/05-20UOFODFPR.mspx?rss_fdn=Press%20Releases&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=2795274" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/carloshm/archive/tags/Office+System/default.aspx">Office System</category><category domain="http://blogs.msdn.com/carloshm/archive/tags/OpenXML/default.aspx">OpenXML</category></item></channel></rss>