This is requiring that a conforming OOXML consumer also be able to understand a specified list of other document formats, including proprietary ones such as MHTML and RTF, and for conforming producers to understand how to convert these formats to OOXML.

This is a serious issue. That language of 11.3.1 specifies explicitly the formats required ("HTML, MHTML, RTF, earlier

lines 15-17 Part 1, Section 11.3.1

te

Proposed Disposition of DIS 29500 Comment CL-0040 (Modified: 2007-11-26) Agreed; these references are inappropriate; the following changes will be made in Part 1, §11.3.1: Page 28, Line 1, “Content Type” row Content Type: Any content, support for which is application-defined. [Note: Some examples of formats which might be supported include: Text = application/txt RTF = application/rtf HTML = application/html XML = application/xml end note] Page 28, lines 3-5 An alternative format import part allows content specified in an application-defined alternate format (HTML, MHTML, RTF, earlier versions of WordprocessingML, or plain text) to be embedded directly in a WordprocessingML document in order to allow that content to be migrated to the WordprocessingML format. Page 28, lines 15-17 A WordprocessingML consumer shall who understands the format of an instance of this part should treat the its contents of such legacy text files as if they were formatted using equivalent WordprocessingML, and if that consumer is also a WordprocessingML producer, it shall emit the legacy text contents of the part in WordprocessingML format. Similar Comments: DE-0006 , DE-0150 , DK-0101 , DK-0151 , DK-0156 , FR-0014 , GB-0041 , KE-0004 , MT-0005 , PH-0006 , US- 0033