Showing posts with label EDD. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EDD. Show all posts

Thursday, April 24, 2014

Andy Warhol Amiga Love... Lost art retrieved from Amiga Floppy disks

ars technica - Lost Warhol works uncovered from old Amiga floppy disks

image

A collection of Warhol works were uncovered in March on a set of old Amiga floppy disks, according to a press release by the Studio for Creative Inquiry (via BoingBoing). The files were eased off of the disks with help from the Carnegie Mellon Computer Club, a collective that specializes in dealing with old computer hardware.

The works were obtained from hardware that was sitting dormant in the Warhol Museum, including "two Amiga 1000 computers in pristine condition," an "early drawing tablet," and "a large collection of floppy diskettes comprised of mostly commercial software."

The fact that the floppy disks contained commercial software as opposed to saved works initially disappointed the team. However, they soon discovered some original and signed works on a GRAPHICRAFT floppy after using a Kickstart ROM to boot the emulator.

...

A fuller description of the technical process is available in PDF form, and a documentary film about the project will screen at the Carnegie Library Lecture Hall in Pittsburgh on May 10.

Awesome Amiga news. Amiga lives! :)

This also kind of relates to my day job in the eDiscovery world, as every so often we have to deal with stuff kind of like this. I remember trying to hunt down a  5 1/4 drive so we could try to read some real floppies... lol

Tuesday, April 08, 2014

Here comes the Sun? The Cloud is becoming less scary for businesses, according to this survey at least...

eDiscovery Daily Blog - Cloud Security Fears Diminish With Experience - eDiscovery Trends

One of the more common trends identified by thought leaders in our recently concluded thought leader series was the continued emergence of the cloud as a viable solution to manage corporate big data.  One reason for that appears to be greater acceptance of cloud security.  Now, there’s a survey that seems to confirm that trend.

...

Forbes - Cloud Security Fears Diminish With Experience, Survey Shows

Security is always the leading fear among companies just starting to dip their toes into the cloud computing realm. However, as time passes and they gain experience, their security worries vanish.

That’s one of the takeaways from a recent survey of 1,068 companies conducted by RightScale, Inc. The survey’s authors report that while the benefits of the cloud increase with experience, the challenges of cloud show a sharp decrease as organizations gain expertise with cloud. Close to one-third of executives and professionals who have not yet implemented cloud say security is their top concern, a number that diminishes to 13 percent of seasoned, heavy users of cloud services (and is only the fifth-ranked concern on their list).

One-fourth of respondents did not have clouds in place, while another 22 percent were seasoned cloud veterans, the survey finds. The reduced concern about security reflects a comfort level that increases as the time spent with cloud engagements increases. That doesn’t mean slacking off on security, of course — ultimately, security is the responsibility of the end-user company.

...

Rightscale - 2014 State of the Cloud Report: See the Latest Trends on Cloud Adoption

The RightScale 2014 State of the Cloud Report includes data and analysis on cloud adoption by enterprises and SMEs in a dozen industries.

Download the report to find out:

  • How you compare in cloud adoption relative to other companies
  • What progress enterprises are making in the journey to hybrid cloud.
  • Key challenges in enterprise cloud strategy and governance.
  • How DevOps and Self-Service IT align with cloud initiatives.
  • Why competition among cloud providers is heating up and how you can benefit.

image

Executive Summary

In February 2014, RightScale surveyed 1068 technical professionals across a broad cross-section of organizations about their adoption of cloud computing.

The 2014 State of the Cloud Survey identified several key findings:

Cloud adoption reaches ubiquity.
• 94 percent of organizations surveyed are running applications or experimenting with infrastructure-as-a-service.
• 87 percent of organizations are using public cloud.

Hybrid cloud is the approach of choice.
• 74 percent of enterprises have a hybrid cloud strategy and more than half of those are already using both public and private cloud.

Enterprise cloud governance lags adoption.
• Less than a third of organizations have defined such critical aspects of governance as which clouds can be used, disaster recovery approaches, and cost management.

The challenge of cloud security is abating.
• The number of respondents who regard cloud security as a significant challenge has decreased among both cloud beginners and cloud pros.

Next-generation IT shapes up as Cloud + DevOps + Self-Service IT.
• Cloud-focused companies embrace DevOps (71 percent) and Self-Service IT (68 percent).

Amazon Web Services (AWS) continues to dominate public cloud adoption, while other vendors battle for second place. Key findings include:
• AWS adoption is 54 percent – 4x the nearest competitor.
• Rackspace Public Cloud is second within the SMB segment.
• IaaS offerings from Google and Microsoft are gaining the interest of cloud users, with Azure leading among enterprises and Google Cloud Platform among small and midsize organizations.

The battle among private cloud technologies is shaping up as a clash of cultures between the open-source OpenStack and proprietary solutions from VMware. Findings include:
• Thirty-one percent of enterprise respondents view their VMware vSphere/vCenter environments as a private cloud.
• OpenStack is well positioned to unseat vSphere in private cloud – coming in first in interest and second in current usage.
• Microsoft System Center is waiting in the wings with a strong third position among enterprise users.

...

Key for this post, "The challenge of cloud security is abating." Interesting thing is that I got the same feeling in talking with my co- attendees at Build, that there's a growth in acceptance, usage and interest. interest was VERY high at the individual level, with many talking about how they are going to use their MSDN Azure allowance to at least play with it...

Thursday, February 27, 2014

Making Relativity relatively faster... Partition it baby, (sometimes)

Brent Ozar - How to Use Partitioning to Make kCura Relativity Faster

kCura Relativity is an e-discovery program used by law firms to find evidence quickly. I’ve blogged about performance tuning Relativity, and today I’m going to go a little deeper to explain why DBAs have to be aware of Relativity database contents.

In Relativity, every workspace (case) lives in its own SQL Server database. That one database houses:

  • Document metadata – where the document was found, what type of document it is
  • Extracted text from each document – the content of emails, spreadsheets, files
  • Document tagging and highlighting – things the lawyers discovered about the documents and noted for later review
  • Workspace configuration – permissions data about who’s allowed to see what documents
  • Auditing trails – who’s searched for what terms, what documents they’ve looked at, and what changes they made

For performance tuners like me, that last one is kinda interesting. I totally understand that we have to capture every activity in Relativity and log it to a table, but log-sourced data has different performance and recoverability requirements than other e-discovery data.

...

However, I don’t recommend doing this by default across all your databases. This technique is going to instantly double the number of databases you have and make your management much more complex. However, I do recommend reviewing your largest workspaces to see if AuditRecord is consuming half or more of the database space. If so, consider partitioning their AuditRecord tables to get faster backups, database maintenance jobs, and restores.

At the risk of sounding like a fanboy, this is one of the reasons I love working with the kCura folks. They really care about database performance, they take suggestions like this, and they implement it in a way that makes a real difference for customers.

This is also why database administrators need to:

  1. Understand the real business purpose of the biggest tables in their databases
  2. Build working, productive relationships with their software vendors
  3. Come up with creative approaches to ease SQL Server pains
  4. Help the vendors implement these approaches in software

..."

If you're a Relativity shop, Brent's one of those "must go to dba guys," which this post makes very apparent...

 

Related Past Post XRef:
Making SQL Server a happy kCura Relativity camper (and your users too)

sp_AskBrent - Your new, "OMG, my SQL Server is sooo slow" free uber SP from Brent Ozar
Two SQL Server Resources that you might want to take another look at...

Free Training SQL Server Training DVD’s (or online) from Quest (reg-ware) - 12 Sessions, Two DVD’s, Zero cost…

"How to Develop Your DBA Career" Free eBook (and posters and whitepapers and more [oh my])

Friday, February 21, 2014

Windows File System and Whitespace characters, do you know the rules?

Support for Whitespace characters in File and Folder names for Windows 8, Windows RT and Windows Server 2012

image

File and Folder names that begin or end with the ASCII Space (0x20) will be saved without these characters. File and Folder names that end with the ASCII Period (0x2E) character will also be saved without this character. All other trailing or leading whitespace characters are retained.
For example:

  • If a file is saved as ' Foo.txt', where the leading character(s) is an ASCII Space (0x20), it will be saved to the file system as 'Foo.txt'.
  • If a file is saved as 'Foo.txt ', where the trailing character(s) is an ASCII Space (0x20), it will be saved to the file system as 'Foo.txt'.
  • If a file is saved as '.Foo.txt', where the leading character(s) is an ASCII Period (0x2E), it will be saved to the file system as '.Foo.txt'.
  • If a file is saved as 'Foo.txt.', where the trailing character(s) is an ASCII Period (0x2E), it will be saved to the file system as 'Foo.txt'.
  • If a file is saved as ' Foo.txt', where the leading character(s) is an alternate whitespace character, such as the Ideographic Space (0x3000), it will be saved to the file system as ' Foo.txt '. The leading whitespace characters are not removed.
  • If a file is saved as 'Foo.txt ', where the trailing character(s) is an alternate whitespace character, such as the Ideographic Space (0x3000), it will be saved to the file system as 'Foo.txt '. The trailing whitespace characters are not removed.

File and Folder names that begin or end with a whitespace character are enumerated differently by the Win32 and WinRT APIs due to ecosystem requirements.

Whitespace Characters
There are various whitespace characters representing various 'space' widths (glyphs). Only the ASCII Space (0x20) and ASCII Period (0x24) characters are handled specially by the Object Manager. Although the Ideographic Space character (0x3000) is also generated by using the Spacebar (when IME is enabled), it is not handled specially.
  • 0x0020 SPACE
  • 0x00A0 NO-BREAK SPACE
  • 0x1680 OGHAM SPACE MARK
  • 0x180E MONGOLIAN VOWEL SEPARATOR
  • 0x2000 EN QUAD
  • 0x2001 EM QUAD
  • 0x2002 EN SPACE
  • 0x2003 EM SPACE
  • 0x2004 THREE-PER-EM SPACE
  • 0x2005 FOUR-PER-EM SPACE
  • 0x2006 SIX-PER-EM SPACE
  • 0x2007 FIGURE SPACE
  • 0x2008 PUNCTUATION SPACE
  • 0x2009 THIN SPACE
  • 0x200A HAIR SPACE
  • 0x200B ZERO WIDTH SPACE
  • 0x202F NARROW NO-BREAK SPACE
  • 0x205F MEDIUM MATHEMATICAL SPACE
  • 0x3000 IDEOGRAPHIC SPACE
  • 0xFEFF ZERO WIDTH NO-BREAK SPACE
Object Manager
ASCII Space (0x20) characters at the beginning or end of a file or folder name are removed by the Object Manager upon creation.
ASCII Period (0x2E) characters at the end of a file or folder name are removed by the Object Manager upon creation.
All other leading or trailing whitespace characters are retained by the Object Manager.
API Enumeration
Win32 API
The Win32 API (CreateFile, FindFirstFil, etc.) uses a direct method to enumerate the files and folders on a local or remote file system. All files and folders are discoverable regardless of the inclusion or location of whitespace characters.
WinRT API
The WinRT API is designed to support multiple data providers (Physical Drives, OneDrive (formerly SkyDrive), Facebook, etc.). To achieve this, WinRT API uses a search engine to enumerate files and folders. Due to the search approach to enumeration, the WinRT API (StorageFile, StorageFolder, etc.) does not handle file and folder names with trailing whitespace characters other than ASCII Space (0x20) and ASCII Period (0x2E) residing on a local or remote file system. It does handle leading non-ASCII whitespace characters.
Observed Behavior
File Explorer and Desktop applications
All files and folders are visible within File Explorer and Desktop applications regardless of inclusion or location of whitespace characters.
Windows Store applications

When using the File Picker, files with a trailing non-ASCII whitespace character do not appear. The contents of sub-folders with a trailing non-ASCII whitespace characters are not displayed in the File Picker. Files or folders containing a leading non-ASCII whitespace character are displayed.

..."

This is something I run into all the time, Windows' automagic handling of beginning/trailing whitespaces, and code that doesn't honor that (cough... like mine sometimes).

What the heck am I talking about?

Imagine you're writing an email export app, and you are using the subject line as the file name, and you're recording that path in a DB somewhere. Sure, you already know to handle special characters, like colons, astricks, etc. But you "know" spaces are okay in a file name, so you don't sweat them. And usually you're right... But you know how many subject lines begin with a space? yeah, enough to screw you up...

If you are taking human created strings and using them as folder or file names, you need to review this KB

Tuesday, January 14, 2014

How Many "Documents" in a Gigabyte? It depends (and it's going up)

E-Discovery Search Blog - How Many Documents in a Gigabyte? An Updated Answer to that Vexing Question

For an industry that lives by the doc but pays by the gig, one of the perennial questions is: “How many documents are in a gigabyte?” Readers may recall that I attempted to answer this question in a post I wrote in 2011, “Shedding Light on an E-Discovery Mystery: How Many Docs in a Gigabyte.”

At the time, most people put the number at 10,000 documents per gigabyte, with a range of between 5,000 and 15,000. We took a look at just over 18 million documents (5+ terabytes) from our repository and found that our numbers were much lower. Despite variations among different file types, our average across all files was closer to 2,500. Many readers told us their experience was similar.

Just for fun, I decided to take another look. I was curious to see what the numbers might be in 2014 with new files and perhaps new file sizes.  So I asked my team to help me with an update. Here is a report on the process we followed and what we learned.[1]

How Many Docs 2014?

For this round, we collected over 10 million native files (“documents” or “docs”) from 44 different cases....

...

Including all files gets us awfully close to 5,000 documents per gigabyte, which was the lower range of the industry estimates I found. If you pull out the EML files, the number drops to 3,594.39, which is midway between our 2011 estimate (2,500) and 5.000 documents per gigabyte.

Which is the right number for you? That depends on the type of files you have and what you are trying to estimate. What I can say is that for the types of office files typically seen in a review, the number isn’t 10,000 or anything close. We use a figure closer to 3,000 for our estimates

image

If you're in my industry, you'll have heard this question a thousand times, seen about a million calculators and zillion charts attempting to answer this, which in the end usually is "it depends." Yet, we've been doing this now for a decade+ and are getting better at answering it. This post does a great, vendor neutral, job in attempting to answer it.

You're not in the eDiscovery/ESI/LitSupport biz? I still think you might find this data interesting as it's something you might not have normally asked or considered...

Hold on there! Exchange Online's Litigation Hold versus In-Place Hold

Welcome to the US SMB&D TS2 Team Blog - Litigation Hold versus In-Place Hold in Exchange Online

I frequently get questions about the compliance archiving capabilities available in Exchange Online and Office 365.  One area that causes a lot of confusion is around Litigation Hold versus In-Place HoldIs Litigation Hold the same as In-Place Hold?  If not, then when and why would I choose to use one versus the other?  Is Litigation Hold going away in favor of In-Place Hold?

First, a little background…  In Exchange 2010 and Exchange Online (pre-service upgrade), Litigation Hold was introduced to allow customers to immutably preserve mailbox content to meet long term preservation and eDiscovery requirements. When a mailbox was placed on Litigation Hold, mailbox content was preserved indefinitely.

In Exchange 2013 and the new Exchange Online, In-Place Hold was introduced which allowed more flexibility in preserving your data.  It allowed you to preserve items matching your query parameters, known as a query-based In-Place Hold, preserve items for a specified period, known as a time-based In-Place Hold, and also preserve everything indefinitely, which emulated the Litigation Hold feature.

After the release of Exchange 2013 and the new Exchange Online, there were initial references in the documentation and in the product itself that Litigation Hold was being deprecated, and included recommendations to use In-Place Hold instead, which added to the confusion.

I want to clarify that Litigation Hold is not being deprecated, and the references to that have been cleaned up in the product and in the documentation.  Both types are available for use and you should use the hold feature that best meets your needs.  Here are some scenarios to help you choose between the two holds.

image

..."

Message Policy, Recovery and Compliance

Archiving Exchange Online-based mailboxes

Exchange Online mailboxes reside in the cloud, and archiving them requires unique hosting environments. In some cases, Exchange Online can also be used to archive on-premises mailboxes in the cloud. The options for archiving with Exchange Online are described in this section.

Exchange Online provides built-in archiving capabilities for cloud-based mailboxes, including an In-Place Archive that gives users a convenient place to store older email messages. An In-Place Archive is a special type of mailbox that appears alongside a user’s primary mailbox folders in Outlook and Outlook Web App. Users can access and search the archive in the same way they access and search their primary mailboxes. Available functionality depends on the client in use:

  • Outlook 2013, Outlook 2010, and Outlook Web App   Users have access to the full features of the archive, as well as related compliance features like control over retention and archive policies.
  • Outlook 2007   Users have basic support for the In-Place Archive, but not all archiving and compliance features are available. For example, users cannot apply retention or archive policies to mailbox items and must rely on administrator-provisioned policies instead.

Administrators use the Exchange admin center or remote Windows PowerShell to enable the personal archive feature for specific users.

For more information about In-Place Archives, see In-Place Archiving.

The Exchange Team Blog - Litigation Hold and In-Place Hold in Exchange 2013 and Exchange Online

In Exchange 2010 and Exchange Online, we introduced Litigation Hold to allow you to immutably preserve mailbox content to meet long term preservation and eDiscovery requirements. When a mailbox is placed on Litigation Hold, mailbox content is preserved indefinitely.

Placing a mailbox on Litigation Hold You can place a mailbox on Litigation Hold by using the Exchange Administration Center (EAC) or the Shell (set the LitigationHoldEnabled parameter). In Exchange 2010, you can also use the Exchange Management Console (EMC) to do this.

...

Preserving items for a specified duration To preserve items for a specified period, we added the LitigationHoldDuration parameter to Exchange Online. This helps you meet your compliance needs by preserving all items in a mailbox for the specified duration, calculated from the date the item was created (date received in case of inbound email). For example, if your organization needs to preserve all mailbox data for seven years, you can place all mailboxes on Litigation Hold and set the LitigationHoldDuration to 7 years (in days).

This functionality is also available in Exchange 2013, allowing you to preserve items for a specified duration in your on-premises organization – one example of how developments in Exchange Online benefit Exchange Server on-premises.

In-Place Hold in Exchange 2013 and Exchange Online

In Exchange 2013 and the new Exchange Online, we introduced In-Place Hold, which allows more flexibility in preserving your data. Hold functionality is integrated with In-Place eDiscovery to allow you to search and preserve using a single wizard or a single cmdlet (New-MailboxSearch). You can use the In-Place eDiscovery & Hold wizard or the cmdlet to search for and preserve items matching your query parameters, known as a query-based In-Place Hold, preserve items for a specified period, known as a time-based hold, and also preserve everything indefinitely, which emulates the old Litigation Hold feature. Check out In-Place eDiscovery and In-Place Hold in the New Exchange - Part I and Part II for more info.

...

Yeah, I know there's maybe 0.57 reader who will find this interesting or useful, but hey, those 0.57 rock! And this is something for my day life that might come in handy on day... so there.

That said, do I really need to make the ESI/Litigation speech? No? Because if your in IT can have any kind of data storage in your realm, you already know that it's only a matter of time? Ok, good...

 

Related Past Post XRef:
Exchange Online getting serious about helping with eDiscovery

Monday, January 06, 2014

PDF's on PDF's... The complete Acrobat PDF Reference Library

Yep, I'm back from my holiday hiatus, and what better way to celebrate than to highlight a bunch of PDF's about PDF's... :)

Inside PDF  - Now Available: Complete Collection of Adobe PDF References

This is a project that I’ve had on my “To Do” list for a while now and I finally had some time today to complete it.

The complete set of Adobe PDF References (1.0-1.7) as well as all associated errata and addenda can now be found on the Acrobat Engineering site.  I’ve also included the Adobe version of ISO 32000-1:2008 (the ISO standard for PDF) and some relevant tech notes as well.

...

Adobe PDF References

This page contains links to every version of the PDF Reference published by Adobe as well as associated errata and addenda to the document.

image

This is one of those pages you'll never be able to find in the future, though you know you saw it "somewhere"...

 

Related Past Post XRef:
Spelunk the technical details of the PDF format with "PDF Succinctly" from Syncfusion (Free/reg-ware PDF/Mobi ebook)
PDF 1.7 Released to ISO for Standardization

Thursday, November 21, 2013

Office/Exchange File Format,Specification and Protocol Documentation refreshed

Microsoft Office File Formats Documentation

The Microsoft Office file formats documentation provides detailed technical specifications for Microsoft proprietary file formats.

The documentation includes a set of companion overview and reference documents that supplement the technical specifications with conceptual background, overviews of file format relationships and interactions, and technical reference information.

Version:
Date Published:

1113

11/20/2013

File name:
File size:

OfficeFileFormatsProtocols.zip

70.8 MB

[[ReadmefirstOffFileFormat]].pdf

137 KB

[MS-CTDOC].pdf

356 KB

[MS-CTXLS].pdf

419 KB

[MS-DOC].pdf

19.1 MB

[MS-DSEXPORT].pdf

485 KB

[MS-FFCHGTR].pdf

139 KB

[MS-ODCFF].pdf

840 KB

[MS-ODRAW].pdf

23.3 MB

[MS-OFCGLOS].pdf

1.6 MB

[MS-OFFCRYPTO].pdf

2.8 MB

[MS-OFFDI].pdf

766 KB

[MS-OFORMS].pdf

5.9 MB

[MS-OFREF].pdf

1.4 MB

[MS-OGRAPH].pdf

5.9 MB

[MS-ONE].pdf

3.1 MB

[MS-ONESTORE].pdf

3.5 MB

[MS-OSHARED].pdf

6.3 MB

[MS-OVBA].pdf

2.9 MB

[MS-OWEMXML].pdf

1.1 MB

[MS-PPT].pdf

23.3 MB

[MS-PST].pdf

5.7 MB

[MS-WORDLFF].pdf

599 KB

[MS-XLDM].pdf

3.8 MB

[MS-XLS].pdf

41.5 MB

[MS-XLSB].pdf

41.1 MB

Microsoft Office Protocol Documentation

The Office protocol documentation provides detailed technical specifications for Microsoft proprietary protocols (including extensions to industry-standard or other published protocols) that are implemented and used in Microsoft Office client programs to interoperate or communicate with Microsoft products.

The documentation includes a set of companion overview and reference documents that supplement the technical specifications with conceptual background, overviews of inter-protocol relationships and interactions, and technical reference information.

Version:
Date Published:

1113

11/20/2013

File name:
File size:

OfficeProto.zip

59.4 MB

[[ReadmefirstOffProto]].pdf

147 KB

[MS-ABS].pdf

2.5 MB

[MS-AVEDGEA].pdf

916 KB

[MS-CONFAS].pdf

1,009 KB

Word, Excel, and PowerPoint Standards Support

This documentation provides detailed support information for the Open Document Format (ODF) and Open XML (ECMA-376 and ISO/IEC-29500) file formats implemented in Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, and Microsoft PowerPoint.

Version:
Date Published:

1113

11/20/2013

File name:
File size:

MSOFFSTAND.zip

38.8 MB

[[ReadmefirstOStand]].pdf

140 KB

[MS-CUSTOMUI].pdf

11.1 MB

[MS-CUSTOMUI2].pdf

3.3 MB

[MS-DOCX].pdf

2.4 MB

Microsoft Exchange and Microsoft Outlook Standards Documentation

The Microsoft Exchange and Microsoft Outlook standards documentation describes how Exchange and Outlook support industry messaging standards and Requests for Comments (RFCs) documents about iCalendar, Internet Message Access Protocol – Version 4 (IMAP4), and Post Office Protocol – Version 3 (POP3).

 

Version:
Date Published:

17.0

11/20/2013

File name:
File size:

Exchange_Standards.zip

4.0 MB

[[ReadmefirstMSExStand]].pdf

143 KB

[MS-OXGLOS].pdf

668 KB

[MS-OXREF].pdf

710 KB

[MS-STANOICAL].pdf

2.3 MB

That's some lite reading for the coming holidays... :)

 

Related Past Post XRef:
Microsoft Format and Specification Documentation 0712 Refresh (Think Office 2013 CP update). Oh and some SharePoint Doc's too
Microsoft Format and Specification Documentation Refresh ("Significantly changed technical content") [Updated: Includes updates for Office 15 Technical Preview ]
Microsoft Office File Formats and Microsoft Office Protocols Documentation Refreshed
Microsoft Office File Formats and Protocols documentation updated for Office 2010 (Think “Now with added ‘X’ flavor… DocX, PptX, XlsX, etc”)

Microsoft Open Specifications Poster

XAML Language Specification (as in the in the full XAML, WPF and Silverlight XAML Specs)

"Microsoft SQL Server Data Portability Documentation"

MS-PST file format specification released. Yep, the full and complete specification for Outlook PST’s is now just a download away.
Microsoft Office (DOC, XLS, PPT) Binary File Format Specifications Released – We’re talking the full technical specification… (The [MS-DOC].pdf alone is 553 pages of very dense specification information)
DOC, XLS and PPT Binary File Format Specifications Released (plus WMF, Windows Compound File [aka OLE 2.0 Structured Storage] and Ink Serialized Format Specifications and Translator to XML news)