The question is, isn't OXML a binary format, too?
For what I understood OXML seems to be a fully documented container, which get's filled with tons of proprietary contents. That makes it de-facto useless for exchanging documents between applications of the Microsoft Windows technology family and the rest of the IT.
I see the scenario, where someone produces a document with a Microsoft application and sends it, in the standardized OXML format to a OpenOffice.org user. Let's say OOo has already been extended by Novell to fully support OXML. But the OOo user doesn't use the Microsoft Windows operating system and therefore the incorporated content cannot be interpreted. The user will be unable to fully enjoy the content of the document and will be forced to switch to Microsoft technology.
Today decision makers have in some extend understood the difference between a binary, proprietary format and open standards. But will they understand the difference between a standardized container format with lots of proprietary undocumented content in it and a fully documented Open Standard like ODF?
Will they go on with their plans to migrate to free software applications like OpenOffice.org or will they stop migrating and just answer there is no need anymore, because they now, after migrating to the new MsOffice, use a standardized open format called OXML?
I think today the most important thing is advocating for the use of ODF and for Free Software applications supporting it. We have the chance to get a well documented open format become the de-facto standard and let MS deal with it. It's not like the DOC/XLS/PPT infection we were faced the all this years, it's a different situation and we have to preserve our advantage.
Happy hacking! Patrick