decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
The results of the ISO voting: Office Open XML is Disapproved - Updated: It's Official
Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 08:26 AM EDT

Here are the results of the voting on OOXML: Disapproved.

The official word is not yet released, but I have seen the results. UK disapproved, as did Ireland. So did Canada. So did the Czech Republic and Korea. Malaysia abstained (which is unexplained, since it was reported the technical committee voted No with Comments). Oddly, I don't see Hungary on the list.

The 11 new P signups, Cote d'Ivoire, Cyprus, Ecuador, Jamaica, Lebanon, Malta, Pakistan, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Uruguay and Venezuela, all voted to approve or approve with comments, except for Ecuador, which disapproved, and Trinidad and Tobago which abstained. What about the O members? Almost to a man, they voted to approve. What an amazing coincidence.

Microsoft is telling it in their press release that 74% of all qualified votes approved: "The results show that 51 ISO members, representing 74 percent of all qualified votes, stated their support for ratification of Open XML."

That is downright silly. If that were true, it would have been approved, not disapproved. All you need for approval is any number greater than 66.6% and not too many no votes. This press release is a masterpiece, no doubt about it. I'll show you the real figures.

Update as of 11:54 AM: Here's official word in a press release from ISO. Here's the opening paragraph:

A ballot on whether to publish the draft standard ISO/IEC DIS 29500, Information technology – Office Open XML file formats, as an International Standard by ISO (International Organization for Standardization) and IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission) has not achieved the required number of votes for approval.


Microsoft says they expect to win approval after the February meeting, and you can see why they would think that, looking at the O members' votes. They are on the committee that handles the comments. Here's the story in PC World from Peter Sayer:

Microsoft Corp. has failed in its attempt to have its Office Open XML document format fast-tracked straight to the status of an international standard by the International Organization for Standardization.

The proposal must now be revised to take into account the negative comments made during the voting process. Microsoft expects that a second vote early next year will result in approval, it said Tuesday.

Not to interfere with the positive spin or anything, but I thought they expected they'd win the first vote too. Here's Andy Updegrove:

Last night, I projected that the OOXML vote in ISO/IEC JTC1 would fail. I now have confirmation from someone who has seen the official results that indeed the vote has failed.

By way of indirect confirmation, Microsoft has issued a press release on the OOXML vote. The release is titled Strong Global Support for Open XML as It Enters Final Phase of ISO Standards Process, and subtitled, "Significant participation by National Bodies in ISO/IEC ratification process for Open XML; final decision expected in March 2008 at close of ballot resolution period."

Microsoft is, of course, counting P and O members in one bunch. The actual percentages go like this:

P-Members voting: 17 in favor out of 32 = 53.12% (requirement >= 66.66%)

Member bodies voting: 18 negative votes out of 69 = 26.08%

Disapproved

Abstentions are not counted. So. There you are. Microsoft's truthiness. A loss is a win in their PR universe. By the way, despite what they say about ODF, there were no negative votes when ODF was voted on and approved as a standard.

So what does it mean? Money can't buy you love, despite my fears shared by some. Not tech love, anyway. If you try to fast track an unbaked format, tech folks will notice it's not done yet.

The Microsoft press release isn't fooling most professional journalists either. Here's the Wall St. Journal's coverage, for example. And here's Times Online's headline: "Microsoft suffers set back in key standards battle". A few are repeating the press release spin, however. That one is funny, because the writer actually thinks the vote was yes. He ends the article, "The NoOOXML campaign, which had predicted a "no" vote, has yet to respond." Duh, it was a No vote. I wonder how he will feel the next time he gets a Microsoft press release. I guess I'll put the press release here too, so you can compare it to the press coverage. This is one time when CompTIA is more forthright than Microsoft. The at least said they were disappointed "but not disheartened."

Here are the real results country by country, again with the proviso that this is an advance peek, not yet the official announcement from ISO:

****************************************

Country Member Participation Voted

Argentina - IRAM - O Member - Abstention
Armenia - SARM - O Member - Approval
Australia - SA - P Member - Abstention
Austria - ON - O Member - Approval with comments
Azerbaijan - AZSTAND - P Member - Approval
Bangladesh - BSTI - - Approval
Barbados - BNSI - - Approval
Belarus - BELST - O Member - Approval
Belgium - NBN - P Member - Abstention
Bosnia and Herzegovina - BAS - - Approval
Brazil - ABNT - O Member - Disapproval
Bulgaria - BDS - O Member - Approval with comments
Canada - SCC - P Member - Disapproval
Chile - INN - O Member - Abstention
China - SAC - P Member - Disapproval
Colombia - ICONTEC - O Member - Approval with comments
Congo, The Democratic Republic of OCC - - Approval
Costa Rica - INTECO - O Member - Approval
Cte-d'Ivoire - CODINORM - P Member - Approval
Croatia - HZN - O Member - Approval
Cuba - NC - O Member - Approval
Cyprus - CYS - P Member - Approval
Czech Republic - CNI - P Member - Disapproval
Denmark - DS - P Member - Disapproval
Ecuador - INEN - P Member - Disapproval
Egypt - EOS - O Member - Approval
Fiji - FTSQCO - - Approval
Finland - SFS - P Member - Abstention
France - AFNOR - P Member - Disapproval
Germany - DIN - P Member - Approval with comments
Ghana - GSB - - Approval with comments
Greece - ELOT - O Member - Approval with comments
India - BIS - P Member - Disapproval
Iran, Islamic Republic of - ISIRI - P Member - Disapproval
Ireland - NSAI - P Member - Disapproval
Israel - SII - O Member - Abstention
Italy - UNI - P Member - Abstention
Jamaica - JBS - P Member - Approval
Japan - JISC - P Member - Disapproval
Jordan - JISM - - Approval with comments
Kazakhstan - KAZMEMST - P Member - Approval
Kenya - KEBS - P Member - Approval with comments
Korea, Republic of - KATS - P Member - Disapproval
Kuwait - KOWSMD - - Approval
Lebanon - LIBNOR - P Member - Approval
Luxembourg - SEE - O Member - Abstention
Malaysia - DSM - P Member - Abstention
Malta - MSA - P Member - Approval with comments
Mauritius - MSB - - Abstention
Mexico - DGN - O Member - Abstention
Morocco - SNIMA - O Member - Approval
Netherlands - NEN - P Member - Abstention
New Zealand - SNZ - P Member - Disapproval
Nigeria - SON - - Approval
Norway - SN - P Member - Disapproval
Pakistan - PSQCA - P Member -Approval
Panama - COPANIT - - Approval
Peru - INDECOPI - O Member - Abstention
Philippines - BPS - O Member - Disapproval
Poland - PKN - O Member - Approval with comments
Portugal - IPQ - O Member - Approval with comments
Qatar - QS - - Approval
Romania - ASRO - O Member - Approval
Russian Federation - GOST R - O Member - Approval
Saudi Arabia - SASO - P Member - Approval
Serbia - ISS - O Member - Approval
Singapore - SPRING SG - P Member - Approval with comments
Slovenia - SIST - P Member - Abstention
South Africa - SABS - P Member - Disapproval
Spain - AENOR - P Member - Abstention
Sri Lanka - SLSI - O Member - Approval
Switzerland - SNV - P Member - Approval with comments
Syrian Arab Republic - SASMO - - Approval
Tanzania, United Rep. of - TBS - - Approval
Thailand - TISI - O Member - Disapproval
Trinidad and Tobago - TTBS - P Member - Abstention
Tunisia - INNORPI - O Member - Approval with comments
Turkey - TSE - P Member - Approval with comments
Ukraine - DSSU - O Member - Approval
United Arab Emirates - ESMA - - Approval
United Kingdom - BSI - P Member - Disapproval
Uruguay - UNIT - P Member - Approval with comments
USA - ANSI - Secretariat - Approval with comments
Uzbekistan - UZSTANDARD - - Approval
Venezuela - FONDONORMA - P Member - Approval with comments
Viet Nam - TCVN - O Member - Abstention
Zimbabwe - SAZ - - Abstention
Ecma International - - Comment Only


Here's the full ISO press statement:

**************************************

Ref.: 1070

Vote closes on draft ISO/IEC DIS 29500 standard

2007-09-04

A ballot on whether to publish the draft standard ISO/IEC DIS 29500, Information technology – Office Open XML file formats, as an International Standard by ISO (International Organization for Standardization) and IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission) has not achieved the required number of votes for approval.

The five-month ballot process ended on 2 September and was open to the IEC and ISO national member bodies from 104 countries, including 41 that are participating members of the joint ISO/IEC technical committee, JTC 1, Information technology.

Approval requires at least 2/3 (i.e. 66.66 %) of the votes cast by national bodies participating in ISO/IEC JTC 1 to be positive; and no more than 1/4 (i.e. 25 %) of the total number of national body votes cast negative. Neither of these criteria were achieved, with 53 % of votes cast by national bodies participating in ISO/IEC JTC 1 being positive and 26 % of national votes cast being negative.

Comments that accompanied the votes will be discussed at a ballot resolution meeting (BRM) to be organized by the relevant subcommittee of ISO/IEC JTC 1 (SC 34, Document description and processing languages) in February 2008 in Geneva, Switzerland.

The objective of the meeting will be to review and seek consensus on possible modifications to the document in light of the comments received along with the votes. If the proposed modifications are such that national bodies then wish to withdraw their negative votes, and the above acceptance criteria are then met, the standard may proceed to publication.

Otherwise, the proposal will have failed and this fast-track procedure will be terminated. This would not preclude subsequent re-submission under the normal ISO/IEC standards development rules.

ISO/IEC DIS 29500 is a proposed standard for word-processing documents, presentations and spreadsheets that is intended to be implemented by multiple applications on multiple platforms. According to the submitters, one of its objectives is to ensure the long-term preservation of documents created over the last two decades using programmes that are becoming incompatible with continuing advances in the IT field.

ISO/IEC DIS 29500 was originally developed as the Office Open XML Specification by Microsoft Corporation which submitted it to Ecma International for transposing into an ECMA standard. Following a process in which other IT industry players participated, Ecma International subsequently published the document as ECMA standard 376.

Ecma International then submitted the standard in December 2006 to ISO/IEC JTC 1, with whom it has category A liaison status, for adoption as an International Standard under the JTC 1 "fast track" procedure. This allows a standard developed within the IT industry to be presented to JTC 1 as a Draft International Standard (DIS) that can be adopted after a process consisting of a one-month review by the national bodies of JTC 1 and then a five-month ballot open to all voting national bodies of ISO and IEC.

About ISO

ISO is a global network of national standards institutes from 157 countries. It has a current portfolio of more than 16 500 standards for business, government and society. ISO's standards make up a complete offering for all three dimensions of sustainable development – economic, environmental and social. ISO standards provide solutions and achieve benefits for almost all sectors of activity, including agriculture, construction, mechanical engineering, manufacturing, distribution, transport, medical devices, information and communication technologies, the environment, energy, quality management, conformity assessment and services.

About IEC

The IEC, headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, is the world’s leading organization that prepares and publishes International Standards for all electrical, electronic and related technologies – collectively known as “electrotechnology”. IEC standards cover a vast range of technologies from power generation, transmission and distribution to home appliances and office equipment, semiconductors, fibre optics, batteries, flat panel displays and solar energy, to mention just a few. Wherever you find electricity and electronics, you find the IEC supporting safety and performance, the environment, electrical energy efficiency and renewable energies. The IEC also manages conformity assessment schemes that certify whether equipment, systems or components conform to its International Standards.


Here is Microsoft's spin:

************************************

Strong Global Support for Open XML as It Enters Final Phase of ISO Standards Process

Significant participation by National Bodies in ISO/IEC ratification process for Open XML; final decision expected in March 2008 at close of ballot resolution period.

September 04, 2007: 06:31 AM EST

REDMOND, Wash., Sept. 4 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Today the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) released the results of the preliminary ballot to participating National Body members for the ISO/IEC DIS 29500 (Ecma 376 Office Open XML file formats) ratification process. The results show that 51 ISO members, representing 74 percent of all qualified votes, stated their support for ratification of Open XML. Along with their votes, the National Bodies also provided invaluable technical comments designed to improve the specification. Many of the remaining ISO members stated that they will support Open XML after their comments are addressed during the final phase of the process, which is expected to close in March 2008.

With at least 87 countries taking part in some way, the Open XML review represents an unprecedented level of participation in the standardization of a document format. Fifty-one ISO members voicing support at this preliminary stage of the process compares favorably with the 32 ISO members supporting Open Document Format (ODF) 1.0 at the end of its process and the 15 ISO members supporting PDF/A-1 at the end of its process. This widespread participation and support is consistent with the rapid adoption of the Ecma Office Open XML file formats across multiple platforms and products from a wide range of IT vendors (including Apple, Novell, Corel, Sun, Microsoft, Java developers and Linux distributors), creating real value for IT users around the globe.

"We are extremely delighted to see that 51 ISO members, representing 74 percent of the qualified votes, have already voiced their support for ISO ratification of Open XML, and that many others have indicated they will support ratification once their comments are resolved in the next phase of the ISO process," said Tom Robertson, general manager for Interoperability and Standards at Microsoft Corp. "This preliminary vote is a milestone for the widespread adoption of the Open XML formats around the world for the benefit of millions of customers. Given how encouraging today's results were, we believe that the final tally in early 2008 will result in the ratification of Open XML as an ISO standard."

Technical Input Will Enhance the Standard

Today's results represent the beginning of the third phase of the ISO/IEC process, called "ballot resolution," during which time Ecma International will respond to all comments that have been submitted by ISO National Bodies and provide them with a final opportunity to voice their support.

"Technical experts around the world have provided invaluable feedback and technical recommendations for evolving the format," Robertson said. "The high quality of the Open XML format will be improved as a result of this process, and we take seriously our role in working within the Ecma technical committee to address the comments received. We believe that the ISO National Bodies will be pleased with the results."

The ISO/IEC process is also designed to create maximum opportunities for ISO members to move from "no" to "yes" in this final phase, and we fully expect the total number of supporting votes to grow. "The objective of the standardization process, whether with Ecma International, ISO/IEC or another standards body, is ultimately to refine a specification and achieve a positive consensus around its formal adoption for the benefit of the entire industry," said Hugo Lueders, group director of EU Public Policy for the Computer Industry Technology Association. "Given the remarkable level of participation from the global standards community, the results from this preliminary ballot are very encouraging."

Although no date has been formally set, the final tally is likely to take place in March 2008. ISO/IEC requires that at least 75 percent of all "yes" or "no" votes (qualified votes) and at least two-thirds of "P" members that vote "yes" or "no" support ratification of a format in the Fast Track process. More information about the ISO/IEC JTC-1 process and its participants is available at http://www.iso.org/iso/standards_development/ processes_and_procedures/iso_iec_ directives_and_iso_supplement.htm.

Widespread Support for Open XML

The Ecma Office Open XML file formats are being rapidly adopted across multiple platforms and products from a wide range of IT vendors, creating real value for IT users around the globe. Thousands of companies from 67 countries on six continents have raised their voices in support of Open XML and its ratification by ISO/IEC at http://www.openxmlcommunity.org. As well, the open standard has also been gaining broad adoption across the software industry for use on a variety of platforms - including Linux, Windows(R), Mac OS and the Palm OS. Independent software vendors (ISVs) and platform providers around the world - such as Apple, Corel, Sun, Microsoft and Novell - are developing solutions using Open XML. Many developers working with the formats are active contributors to http://www.openxmldeveloper.org.

Those working with Open XML can attest to the benefits of this open file format in the areas of file and data management, data recovery, interoperability with line-of-business systems, and the long-term preservation of documents. Open XML is optimized for the level of precision and detail that facilitates carrying forward billions of existing files. As well, Open XML file formats are uniquely capable of integrating other types of systems and data with Open XML documents, while maintaining a clean, simple separation of presentation (Open XML markup) and data (custom schemas and instances thereof). This means that organizations can use Open XML formats to report information from other applications and systems without having to translate it first, which is a key innovation for developers seeking to incorporate real- time business information into their documents, or those who seek to "tag" documents with their own categorization system to improve their understanding of its contents.

More information about Open XML, as well as available solutions using the open standard specification, is available at http://www.openxmlcommunity.org/ momentum.aspx#technology.

Commitment to Interoperability

The Open XML Translator (http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/ odf- converter) is one among many interoperability projects Microsoft has undertaken. We continue to work with customers and others in the industry to address the critical interoperability issues of our customers through the delivery of products that are interoperable by design, collaboration on interoperability projects, providing access to interoperability technologies, and standardization. Other evidence of collaboration includes our technical collaborations with AOL LLC and Yahoo! Inc. for instant messaging interoperability, the broad collaboration with Novell on virtualization, document formats and intellectual property, and the creation of the Interoperability Vendor Alliance. More information is available at http://www.microsoft.com/interop.

Founded in 1975, Microsoft is the worldwide leader in software, services and solutions that help people and businesses realize their full potential.


  


The results of the ISO voting: Office Open XML is Disapproved - Updated: It's Official | 355 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corrections here please, if any (n/t)
Authored by: tiger99 on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 09:13 AM EDT

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off Topic Thread
Authored by: MDT on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 09:14 AM EDT
Off Topic Here, make them links Clicky if you can.

---
MDT

[ Reply to This | # ]

Comments on Newspicks items here please (n/t)
Authored by: tiger99 on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 09:17 AM EDT

[ Reply to This | # ]

So MS has now more time for lobbying
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 09:25 AM EDT
early next year gives them plenty of opportunities to:
1) lobby/bribe for more countries participate with P status.
2) address some of the issues to improve their MS-XML.

This time around they messed up up a bit. I'll bet within the coming month they
will choose a more subtle approach.

My question: Do all of the specification(comments) submitted have to be
addresses?, or can a vote be passed regardless if they were addresses?

[ Reply to This | # ]

I still can't believe it
Authored by: Winter on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 09:26 AM EDT
MS really snatched defeat from the fangs of victory!

They had everyting: stacked votes, manipulated ballot boxes, billions of money,
the best PR and politicians money can buy. Allies in every possible position.
Whole countries participated only to help MS. And still they lost.

I really really did not expect this.

Rob

---
Some say the sun rises in the east, some say it rises in the west; the truth
lies probably somewhere in between.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The results of the ISO voting: YES! YES! YES!
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 09:29 AM EDT
YES! And another round of thanks to PJ. Groklaw's influence on informed opinion
in cases of such a tight vote can not be discounted. Let's keep it up for
another NO next year!

biteydog

[ Reply to This | # ]

The results of the ISO voting: Office Open XML is Disapproved
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 09:29 AM EDT
Woot, I'm glad my country's standards organization voted the RIGHT way.

[ Reply to This | # ]

M$ continue to lie......
Authored by: tiger99 on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 09:30 AM EDT
Their nasty piece of spin contains a number of lies and falsehoods, and conveys the impression that people everywhere are rushing madly to implement OOXML everywhere, even on Linux. Well, maybe Miguel is, I don't know, but I doubt that any other developers will waste time on such an ill-defined piece of trash, probably not even in the very unlikely event that it does eventually become an ISO standard.

Something ought to be done, and quickly, about Convicted Monopolists who continue to put utter lies and falsehoods in their press releases.

IANAL, so I don't know what laws apply here, but no doubt simply continuing to publish the truth, which is what PJ and Groklaw does, will help. But I think that far more is necessary, because many decision-makers actually believe lies like that.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The results of the ISO voting: Office Open XML is Disapproved
Authored by: phantom21 on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 09:32 AM EDT
It's good this process, in as much as it was manipulated
by MS, the proposal was disapproved. However, it can
still be pushed by MS and it's incumbent on those who
oppose OOXML as a standard that the countries which
abstained be convinced to change the next vote to
disapprove. Further, how does O country voting work in
the approval process in March?

Can countries which voted one way now change their vote in
March?

Can the current O countries be promoted to P countries?

I'd like some more clarification on the rest of the
process.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The results of the ISO voting: Office Open XML is Disapproved
Authored by: PolR on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 09:32 AM EDT
If I understand correctly, MS needs to swing 6 P-members no votes into yes. An
upgrade of a sufficient number of O-members to P-members would reduce this
number.

This seems to be a pretty feasible task as long as there are ways to do that
without addressing the merits of the standard.

Andy Updegrove makes clear that it is the vote at the end of the ballot
resolution meeting (BRM) in February that has the final say. Countries may
change both their votes and their O/P member status until then. The meaning of
this ballot is to determine if a BRM is required and list the comments that need
to be addressed for countries to change their votes.

We should watch if there are countries that voted no with a short list of easily
addressable comments. These countries could change their stance if MS makes some
concessions.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Venezuela voted "Approve"?
Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 09:38 AM EDT
Based on comments here, plus my own understanding from mainstream news of that country, it seems impossible that they would vote "Yes."

Something is very wrong with that, Venezuela voting pro-American.

---
Free minds, Free software

[ Reply to This | # ]

the numbers seems to match for me
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 09:41 AM EDT
I am happy for the negative results and do not want to nit-pick PJ's commentary, but I think it is clear where the MS numbers are coming from and they seem to match the official results quoted:
Microsoft is telling it that 74% of all qualified votes approved: "The results show that 51 ISO members, representing 74 percent of all qualified votes, stated their support for ratification of Open XML."

That is downright silly. If that were true, it would have been approved, not disapproved. All you need for approvel is any number greater than 66.6%. They are, of course, counting P and O members in one bunch. The actual percentages go like this:

P-Members voting: 17 in favor out of 32 = 53.12% (requirement >= 66.66%)
Member bodies voting: 18 negative votes out of 69 = 26.08%

MS quotes 51 in favour and 74%. The last line of the above quote from the official result says 18 negative out of 69 for member bodies voting, that leaves 69-18=51, just like the MS number, furthermore 100%-26%=74% again just as in the MS report. So they are correct, 51 or 74% was not negative, i.e. you can spin that as positive... Zs.Zs.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The results of the ISO voting: Office Open XML is Disapproved
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 09:44 AM EDT
So do they now just give more money to the "no with comments" folks
(and maybe address a concern or two) and get it through next year?

[ Reply to This | # ]

That give us 5 months to educate them.
Authored by: arthurpaliden on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 09:44 AM EDT
What is now required is for action in the yes countries to educate the members
of their respective comities and media outlets educational institutions on the
shortfalls of accepting the MS proposed standard. This will require the
creation of a well thought out 'teaching pack' of information, just supplying
them with URLs will not be sufficient.

It should contain in both 'PowerPoint', PDF as well as text documentation
(written word on paper) and highlight the physical problems brought forward by
the comments, the historical records aspect, the fact that several of the larger
countries in the world are adopting it and of course the costs associated with
using a proprietary standard.

I know that this is a lot of work, especially the translation of all
documentation to local languages but if started now. I feel, will go a long way
to countering the PR (and cash) about to be forth coming from Microsoft.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Servers very slow. I wonder why?
Authored by: tiger99 on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 09:45 AM EDT
Both Groklaw and Andy Updegrove's blog are very slow right now. I think that
there is a rather large amount of interest!

[ Reply to This | # ]

The results of the ISO voting: Office Open XML is Disapproved
Authored by: PolR on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 10:01 AM EDT
Of the P-countries the following ones have abstained: Australia, Belgium,
Finland, Italy, Malaysia, Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, Trinidad and Tobago.
This is nine countries that can decide to vote one way or another between now
and the end of the BRM. We should watch the lobbying there.

Of the P-countries, the following ones voted Yes with comments: Germany, Kenya,
Malta, Singapore, Switzerland, Turkey, Uruguay, USA, Venezuela.

Of the O-countries, the following ones voted yes with comments: Austria,
Bulgaria, Columbia, Greece, Poland, Portugal, Tunisia,

Jordan voted yes with comments but is not listed as a P or O country.

This makes 9 P-countries, 7 O-countries and Jordan that voted yes with comments.
What will they do at the BRM if their comments are not addressed? Will they
still vote yes? Or will they change their votes to No? I think the trick of
promising the comments to be addresed at the BRM if they vote "yes with
comments" has a high risk of backlash if MS doesn't deliver the goods.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The results of the ISO voting: Office Open XML is Disapproved
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 10:04 AM EDT
This is good and thank for all the great work so far.

The activities conducted by Microsoft and its minions leave me with a terrible
taste in my mouth. The corruption of due process, the corruption of many
national comities.

I have a long list of questions to all kinds of authority.

How can any law enforcing agencies around the world accept this kind of ballot
rigging?
How and why is this kind of corporate corruption accepted, by ISO and the
national comities?
Why should we as consumer accept that Microsoft and its minions can act like
this?

Their minions have only loaded the national comities, not taken part in the
technical discussions. They have done nothing to improve the text of the
proposed standard. Instead the minions have hindered the improvements need in
the proposed standard.

Most governments have policies not to trade with companies using corruptions as
part of their marked expansion, and this is corruption. Grand scale.

The point which should be important for every consumer in the world is; the
current state of the proposed standard will only serve Microsoft and its
minions.

As customers we would want more competition, more choice and better price. We
should be able to select the tools we use and still be able to access our files
and documents. Those files and documents belong to us, not Microsoft.


Sigvald

[ Reply to This | # ]

Approval with comments: 7 countries
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 10:08 AM EDT
Seven countries (O members) voted "Approval with comments
"

I understand their comments will be totally disregarded. Will ISO tell them so?
Will they have the right to vote "NO" in March?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Remember "No, with comments" != "No"
Authored by: Sesostris III on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 10:08 AM EDT
Folks, before we get carried away, remember that "No, with comments"
is not the same as "No". Remember, the correct procedure (AFAIK) if
you approve, but have some issues that need to be worked out, is to vote
"No, with comments" rather than "Yes". "Yes, with
comments" seems to be an anomaly (according to the rules)!

Some countries (e.g. Ireland) even go so far as to say that their vote is an
approval, albeit qualified. Norway (I believe) did similarly. In the UK the BSI
press release stated that "It identified a number of technical issues in
the document which need to be addressed before the UK can approve ISO/IEC DIS
29500 OOXML as an International Standard". This is not an outright
rejection! Presumably, if these "technical issues" were addressed,
then the BSI would be happy to change its vote to "Yes". I'm sure the
same applies to Ireland, Norway, et al.

I am not aware of any country voting "No" outright.

Sesostris III

[ Reply to This | # ]

"Microsoft is saying they expect to win approval after the February meeting..."
Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 10:09 AM EDT
Well then, that means they can safely ignore AFNOR's proposal highlighted in the last article, then.

Their strategy may come back to haunt them.

---
Free minds, Free software

[ Reply to This | # ]

Please continue the real work..
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 10:17 AM EDT
..of exposing the corrupted officials, standard bodies who got bullied. bribed
or changed their votes under pressure. If we don;t do this, this will be short
lived. If money can but these so called 'voting rights', what is the point in
having standard organizations. Almost the entire 'Arabic speaking' counties have
voted for OOXML. It's unfortunate that the 'democracy leader' USA has for OOXML.
Congratulations everyone, but don;t forget your mission, that;s to make this
momentum going until 'we people have the real power'

[ Reply to This | # ]

The results of the ISO voting: Office Open XML is Disapproved
Authored by: Jimbob0i0 on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 10:23 AM EDT
Personally I look forward to seeing how MS/ECMA deal with fulfilling their
promises to NBs that comments would be reviewed in a yes with comments
scenario.
If they dismiss those comments and only deal with comments that were submitted
as no with comments (as would be proper) then it is feasible that those
countries that previously voted yes with comments might feel insulted or
otherwise upset their comments weren't dealt with as promised and change their
vote to no - that would be great!

[ Reply to This | # ]

The vorpal blade went snicker-snack
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 10:31 AM EDT
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The results of the ISO voting: Office Open XML is Disapproved
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 10:38 AM EDT
Headline in today's NY Times:

"Microsoft Favored to Win Open Document Vote"

The article is by someone named Kevin J.
O'Brien (who is he?), and the first paragraph
reads:

"Amid intense lobbying, Microsoft is expected to squeak
out a victory this week to have its open document format,
Office Open XML, recognized as an international standard,
people tracking the vote said Monday."

Perhaps Mr. O'Brien needs better sources?!

[ Reply to This | # ]

What happens to the "Yes, with comments"
Authored by: FrankH on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 10:40 AM EDT
What about countries who voted "Yes, with comments because they were told
that it was the same as voting "No, with comments". When the ballot
resolution is over and their comments haven't been addressed can they change
their votes to No?

---
All right now, baby it's all right now.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Pursuit
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 11:15 AM EDT
An important thing to remember is that this isn't over by a long shot. There's
a military adage about not stopping the fighting when the enemy is momentarily
defeated; you need to pursue and keep up the fight or he'll just turn and fight
again.

As Sun Tzu put it, defeat occurs in the mind of the enemy, and clearly Microsoft
hasn't given up on this yet.

As others above have pointed out, there needs to be a serious push in all those
countries with voting irregularities (which includes the US with our last minute
vote change) to root out exactly what happened and why, and to bring popular
opinion and, if appropriate, legal action to bear against any who acted
unethically. Certainly shine a bright light on the activities.

This pressure has to be maintained to discourage others from being corrupted by
MSFT shenanigans and to keep up the pressure on "no" voters to not
change their vote without their concerns being seriously and legitimately
addressed.

This battle is over, and we can all take a few minutes to cheer and congratulate
ourselves. But we haven't won the war yet.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The big question to me is...
Authored by: rsi on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 11:38 AM EDT
Whether or not the ISO, and/or the Standards Bodies of individual countries,
will investigate M$'s attempt to corrupt the ISO Standards process, and
"Buy" an ISO "Standard".

It is my hope that EVERY country WILL do so, and that they WILL expose the
TRUTH!!! The entire OPEN Standards process will be more strong as a result when
NO ONE COMPANY in ANY country thinks they can get away with such a stunt!!!

Mickey$oft and SCO are their own worst enemies!!!

[ Reply to This | # ]

The comments
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 11:48 AM EDT
Since Microsoft now has to address the comments, will
solving them brake the compatibility with their current
office documents ?

[ Reply to This | # ]

How can we write to ISO saying I have newfound respect for their process.
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 11:53 AM EDT
Seems like ISO Fast Track has gotten a lot of negative press as a
"rubber-stamp process" on many blogs.

Seems some positive feedback to ISO might be called for. Anyone know a useful
channel to tell them that respect ISO standards in general goes up quite a bit
when they do obviously correct things.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The results of the ISO voting: Office Open XML is Disapproved - Updated: It's Official
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 12:13 PM EDT
Wow, if you total up the number of countries that approved with comments (18)
and the number that outright voted no (19), that is more than enough to sink the
proposal even if you tally all member counties in this count.

I wonder how many of the 18 voted this way thinking they were voting something
that equated a "no", and what they think about being included in the
number who show "strong global support" for OOXML.

Hmmm...


Neil

[ Reply to This | # ]

If you try to fast track an unbaked format ...
Authored by: tanstaafl on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 12:22 PM EDT
... tech folks may notice it's not done yet, but their bosses can be bought and
don't really care. Sometimes these bosses can be embarrassed into voting as
their tech subordinates recommend, but keep in mind that Dilbert is funny to
most folks in a gallows-humor sort of way; it's either laugh or go postal.
Microsoft knows this, and because they've always won by being the better
salesmen, the better PR guys, the guys with the most money, the better
politicians, and never the guys with the best technical solution, I would not
count them out just yet. Sleaze carries the day more often than not.

[ Reply to This | # ]

This will be a victory...
Authored by: DaveJakeman on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 12:31 PM EDT
...only when ISO fully realises what a shambles can be made of its processes by
a Massive International Corporation Resolute On Squeezing Out Fair Trade. That
result, 53%, was too close for comfort.

It needs more than just education and exposure of Microsoft's dirty tricks to
ensure sanity prevails, for Microsoft are devious and will have found new ways
to corrupt ISO and its processes by the time of the next vote. IMHO, if MS-XML
continues through to the next vote without being vetoed or rejected outright by
ISO itself, we will have failed.

The ISO needs to realise there is more at stake here than just a document
standard. They need to wake up and smell the coffee, or face the consequences
of inaction.

---
Only two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity – and I'm not
sure about the former. -- Einstein

[ Reply to This | # ]

Microsoft Spin Factory
Authored by: mhoyes on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 12:31 PM EDT
This would be like a MS spin of:

In the competition between ODF and OOXML, ODF came in first, and OOXML came in
second.

MS (fake verson) version:

In the OOXML competition, OOXML came in second, but ODF came in next to last.

[ Reply to This | # ]

USA approves?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 12:36 PM EDT
Why in the world would the USA approve this nonsense?

J (a proud Canadian)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Commitment to Interoperability
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 12:40 PM EDT

"Commitment to Interoperability" simply means a commitment the use the
word 'interoperability' a lot of times in a very short paragraph.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Well... thats a suprise :D
Authored by: SilverWave on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 12:42 PM EDT
hmm I would have though ms would have had it sewn up..

I wonder what when wrong?

---
"intellectual property" - a propaganda term designed to confuse patent law with
copyright and other unrelated laws and to muddy the different issues they raise.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sorry, I see this differently - allow and ENFORCE that spec.
Authored by: Peter Baker on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 12:43 PM EDT
I think the approach is flawed. You should not be working on the ISO committee
- you should be working on industry and government. A numerically small
membership can be bought and/or coerced and is thus de facto vulnerable to
process abuse and vote rigging.

Let's turn this one on its head. I'm perfectly happy with MS ratifying a 6000+
page spec, because the moment they have the ISO standard status they will to
abide by it to be compliant.

I don't think it would be wildly unfair to ask MS to then ensure AND PROVE
BEYOND DOUBT that the product they supply is FULLY compliant with their ISO
standard.

To me, that would mean:

(1) A full test suite needs to be constructed of which independent scrutiny is
paid for by MS. MS Office needs to be fully compliant with statements as made
in the specifications. No ifs, no buts, no maybe. Only full compliance means
an acceptable product, but that's only 50% of the requirement - there's more,
mainly addressing the reason the whole ISO standard compliance is required:

(2) The identification and demonstration of a mature, competing product that can
read, edit and write the documents produced by the above compliant suite to a
standard that makes it clear there is 100% interoperability.

The latter proves to the evaluating entity that:

(1) the standard is complied with, and is not just a marketing gimmick.
(2) the interoperability needs are addressed
(3) there is an alternative product which prevents vendor lock in (this is why I
used the word 'MATURE' - you don't want some last-minute coded piece of junk
from an MS friendly vendor pretending it's a product). A product has an
established user base.

If the product on offer cannot meet those two requirements the story is over.
Simple. If no 3rd party can create a competing product or, at a minimum,
achieve unencumbered interoperability (i.e. not depending on a license) then the
product is unsafe from a disaster recovery point of view.

So, if Microsoft's 6000+ page spec is a bit too much for either themselves or
someone else to implement, the answer is easy - make one that works. That's all
the world has been asking, simple unencumbered interoperability. I'm fully
aware that that doesn't agree with their current business model, but they ought
to read "who moved my cheese" - the supply is dwindling.

IMHO they had their opportunity with ODF. They blew it.



---
= P =

[ Reply to This | # ]

Office Open XML is Disapproved
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 12:46 PM EDT

I was hoping for a 'Denied with Prejudice' ruling.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Open Malaysia about the Malaysia vote: Did we abstain?!
Authored by: Winter on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 12:58 PM EDT

Another example of how a no vote can turn into abstain without the committee members knowing why: OOXML is not (yet) an ISO standard, as Malaysia votes "No" ... or did we?

Let's make the world clear. This was a dirty fight. And I have not seen a single reprehensible action taken by the advocates of good standards (ie, those opposed to MSOOXML). All the dirt came from one side only, the Pro MSO-not-so-OXML camp.

Rob

---
Some say the sun rises in the east, some say it rises in the west; the truth lies probably somewhere in between.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Turn the tide back.
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 01:15 PM EDT
Now that you've see how your countries has voted, now is as good a time as any to contact your NB and ask questions how they arrived at the vote.

Obviously be respectful, its quite likely many officials have just read MS reports and assumed everyone else is giving approval.

If the board is weighted towards MS, perhaps it may be worth contacting your government.

Chriss

[ Reply to This | # ]

Canada didn't bend over for M$ ? somethings wrong (n/t)
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 01:25 PM EDT
seriously though, since when does Canada not do whatever the US tells us to?

I can't believe Canada seemed to have a backbone on this issue, I guess time
will tell.

and I'm so disappointed in Switzerland, they should know better. sheesh

[ Reply to This | # ]

The results of the ISO voting: Office Open XML is Disapproved - Updated: It's Official
Authored by: ThrPilgrim on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 01:47 PM EDT

I said I'd post the email I received from the BSi. Ok its a bit late now but it shows where they where coming from.

Dear John,
Thank you for your email.
It’s not BSI’s practice to share details of how a technical committee has voted on international standards. However, we can tell you that the BSI technical committee has submitted a significant number of comments on the standard. The comments, along with those of other national standards bodies, will be reviewed at a ballot resolution meeting, should one be called.
Please contact me if you have any further enquiries.
Best wishes,
Lucy

I like the line a significant number of comments :-)

[ Reply to This | # ]

The results of the ISO voting: Office Open XML is Disapproved - Updated: It's Official
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 02:34 PM EDT
I wonder if M$ really counts on buying ISO vote for 29/02/1900 or even
00/01/1900 becoming an international standard ?
Money can buy everything ?

[ Reply to This | # ]

To the tune of "Lion Sleeps Tonight"
Authored by: oneandoneis2 on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 02:37 PM EDT

WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Will stick with O.D.F
WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Will stick with O.D.F

In the standards
The ISO standards
No O.O.X.M.L
Without standards
True open standards
Software's a harder sell!

WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Will stick with O.D.F
WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Will stick with O.D.F

Many pages
Thousands of pages
Define O.O.X.M.L
There's no software
No office software
Can implement it well!

(Available under a CC license from here)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Strange, Sweden is missing from the list.
Authored by: IMANAL on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 02:45 PM EDT
Strange, Sweden is missing from the list. I think they
voted "abstained". Or were there too many issues
surrounding that vote?

-

---
--------------------------
IM Absolutely Not A Lawyer

[ Reply to This | # ]

Tammany Hall and Boss Tweed would be proud of the M$ effort!
Authored by: David Dudek on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 02:53 PM EDT
Tammany Hall and Boss Tweed would be proud of the M$ effort! M$ used many of the same tactics: expanding the voting of newly-arrived "partners", 'supporting' the "partner" membership so they could vote for the OOXML "candidate".

Ahhhh,... the perks of "partnership".

---
David Dudek

[ Reply to This | # ]

Hah! Another Stunning Victory for Steve Ballmer, King of Earth!
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 03:39 PM EDT
It figures that the Groklaw propaganda factory would spin Microsoft losing the
vote as some kind of "defeat"!

What's needed around here is some "responsible journalism" as
exemplified here!:

<<Microsoft takes big step towards OOXML approval 1:04PM, Tuesday 4th
September 2007
The ISO has given preliminary backing to Office Open XML. A large majority of
the international standards body voted to support ratification of Microsoft's
file format.

Although the "yes" vote was short of the required majority, many of
the members who voted no, including the UK, indicated they would approve OOXML
as a standard once some technical issues have been addressed.

Microsoft was naturally delighted with the result and welcomed the
"invaluable technical comments designed to improve the
specification".>>
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/123978/microsoft-takes-big-step-towards-ooxml-approv
al.html

See? The "yes" vote was merely "short of the required
majority"!

What? That means that they *lost*?

Nevermind.

[ Reply to This | # ]

This Battle has been won, yet the War continues...
Authored by: Nivag on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 03:46 PM EDT
We must not relent our endeavours to promote free and open standards!

-Nivag

[ Reply to This | # ]

Corruption and rigging of ISO voting must be fixed now!
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 04:02 PM EDT
Or Microsoft will rig it for sure for the second ballot.

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Suggestion - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 05:14 PM EDT
    • Suggestion - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, September 05 2007 @ 11:51 PM EDT
The results of the ISO voting: Office Open XML is Disapproved - Updated: It's Official
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 04:10 PM EDT
Huzzah!

Time for the victory dance.

[ Reply to This | # ]

dissappointed
Authored by: vruz on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 04:35 PM EDT
Very dissappointed my country voted "yes".

No wonder Microsoft representatives are always present at OLPC meetings and
lobby hard the ignorant politicians of this powerless nation.

In a way, it's fortunate we don't have much voting power to influence the
outcome of such an important resolution.

Shame on you, Uruguay.


---
--- the vruz

[ Reply to This | # ]

What now?
Authored by: Alan(UK) on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 05:22 PM EDT
The next job is to resolve the 'comments' (really objections). Some may be
dismissed by general agreement as unfounded. But the vast majority will have
been made by the technically competent members of the national bodies.

The problem for Microsoft is that it is effectively on its own when it comes to
technical discussion of the merits of MSOOXML. (They are hardly likely to get
any technical support from ECMA.)

Microsoft will have to choose which points it is prepared to back down on and
which ones it is not prepared to budge on. It is unlikely that any sort of
compromise could be reached. The other side knows that the Microsoft standard is
rubbish and has no reason to give way. Until it comes to another vote,
Microsoft's hired electors will have to wait in the wings.

What will happen when another vote is taken? Will it actually be better for them
the next time round? One thing is certain, they will not be voting on the Office
2007 file format.

Microsoft was trying to make Office 2007 into an ISO standard - they have just
failed.

---
Microsoft is nailing up its own coffin from the inside.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I am embarrased
Authored by: rvergara on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 05:35 PM EDT
In my country, Chile, the INN (Chilean Standards Institute) voted for
abstention.

As an advocate of open standards and Groklaw faithful reader I miserably failed
in checking what our country vote was going to be.

I will not fail twice, this time I will contact senate members of the technology
committee and will pass as much information as I can deliver. Call it a personal
crusade if you will.

I will start by passing the excellent presentation prepared by Anand Vaidya from
Singapur, documenting the major flaws OOXML/ECMA 376 has. You can get that
document <a
href="http://www.asianlinux.org/downloads/docs/itsc2007/ODF-vs-OOXML-latest
.pdf/">Here</a>

Regards

Ramiro

[ Reply to This | # ]

Complexity = Monopoly
Authored by: Nomen Publicus on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 05:37 PM EDT
It's to Microsofts advantage to increase the complexity of any product as it
raises the barriers presented to compeditors. The ISO farce was just an attempt
to formalise the process. If Microsoft had succeeded, and in the future some
company challenged them over any kind of inter-operability, MS would claim in
court that they just implemented ISO (whatever) and anybody else was free to do
the same. But the cost of correctly implementing a 6000 page specification,
much of which consists of hand-waving and plain wrong algorithms, will be vast.
Far cheaper to license the code from Microsoft. Thus Microsoft maintains its
monopoly and its grip on peoples data.

---
If you love some code, set it free.

[ Reply to This | # ]

This will end bad
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 06:15 PM EDT
Microsoft got 53% approval on first try, with the fast track process. They
won't need 66% for the regular process, will they?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Can the USA Yes vote be reversed in February?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 06:26 PM EDT

The USA voted "yes", after an ANSI technical committee had decided to vote "No", apparently because of some political pressure. Can this appalling situation be challenged - even corrected?

Put another way, is the USA now as corrupt as the average banana republic, or is there still a chance for democracy and law here?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Interoperability Vendor Alliance??
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 06:41 PM EDT
Sort of like the BSA (Interoperate with us or else....)?
Or more like a club of vendors dependent on the Microsoft business model to
survive (hook, lock-in, sqeeze)?

[ Reply to This | # ]

The ECMA announcement/spin
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 07:28 PM EDT

This week-end marked an important milestone in the standards review process for ISO/IEC DIS 29500 (ECMA-376: Office Open XML), with the official closure of the fast-track ballot.

Ecma TC45 is encouraged by the strong level of participation from over 80 National Body members who have taken part in reviewing the specification during this step of the fast-track process.

As the process moves forward, TC45 will maintain active involvement by supporting the ISO/IEC DIS 29500 Editor, who will be tasked to produce a proposed disposition of all comments received during the ballot period.

....

th e rest here

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Ban them - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, September 05 2007 @ 07:03 AM EDT
The results of the ISO voting: Office Open XML is Delayed - Updated: It's Inevitable
Authored by: webster on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 08:07 PM EDT
..
IANAT/G

1. Clearly the Monopoly was caught unawares by the high level of enlightenment
that illuminated the committee meetings toward the end of the process. They
would not have allowed this if they had more time. With discounts and bonuses
they could have overwhelmed the committees with their "partners."
Obviously the same plants and shills aren't working so well anymore. Uneasy
lies the head that wars the crown. The problem with being a Monopoly is that it
is you against the world. You can't relax.

2. This delay of MS-XML allows a slow leak to ODF. The Monopoly has cast it as
a step in the inevitable process that will triumph in February. The Monopoly
will not wait to stack the vote with friends. If the process doesn't change,
they have the resources to overwhelm the process. As a Monopoly their orders
must be "Make MS-XML victory certain."

3. The Monopoly is going to have to overwhelm the process because they can't
fool around with any technical details. It has to be an "All MS-XML"
proposition with no technical questions interfering. If they let ISO fool
around with the technical questions, they would come up with a true standard
that might let other software entities implement the standard fully. The
Monopoly does not want anyone else to implement "their" standard.
They do NOT want a REAL standard. As has been noted before, a true
implementable MS-XML Standard is not possible for the Monopoly. It is the last
thing they want. By this process they are trying to extend their office suite
monopoly for several more decades. If a true implementable MS-XML Standard
comes into existence, it would be a failure. People would then just need the
MS-XML Standard, and not the Monopoly Office Suite. A truly implementable
MS-XML Standard would eliminate their Monopoly Lock-In, Lock-Out Power. For the
ISO to declare incomprehensible, incomplete 6,000 page specifications as a
standard with maybe one possible Monopoly implementation, is mass hysteria, and
an example of unbridled power. The World is living through the exercise of
corporate fascism. Our governments eschew freedom and embrace the party line in
the good graces and favors of the Monopoly --to their own long-term detriment
and that of their citizens.

3.1 With relatively subtle steps, like this ISO-MS-XML fiasco, the Monopoly is
approaching Monopoly Perfection. While they can't do something outrageous like
turn off the connectivity of "enemy" computers, they are getting
closer with MS-XML. Once approved with no widespread implementations, nor,
indeed, with any implementations at all, they will change it so that no one else
will ever catch up. They will have lock-in and lock-out and keep changing their
standard to maintain their hardware/software treadmill, in other words
--Monopoly-Business-As-Usual. They covet the day when they can simply turn off
any software or computers that do not pay them to interconnect.

3.2 To repeat, the last thing that the Monopoly wants is interoperability of
software. They want 100% operability of Monopoly Software. Their PR is a lie.
Their propaganda twists reality to the party line. The masses absorb what is
presented them. Check out the press release above and Monopoly ads. Why does
the press always say an "internet virus" instead of a "Windows
virus?"

4. Permitting ODF was a colossal error. It must be destroyed. MS-XML can do
that. ODF must be stopped at all costs like in Massachusetts.

5. Our governments are no match for the Monopolies, they are patsies, e.g. the
Department of Justice, Massachusetts politicians. Every candidate knows that
they must support the Monopoly or grant a few hundred thousand dollar advantage
to their opponents.

6. Opposition must come from the grass-roots users. Carry an OpenCD and an
Ubuntu disk around. Link people to OpenOffice.org (OO.o). Once they experience
OO.o, they are free of the Monopoly. Such people may thank you every time they
see you.

7. The Monopoly does not know what a defeat is. That's how they got to be a
Monopoly. Look at the US Anti-Trust case. They have won for losing. Look at
the endless Europe proceeding. The Monopoly is larger than the departments
pretending to regulate them. They can also go over their heads. This ISO
delay is just that. It is damaging. They must fight the uptake of ODF without
an authoritative substitute. Vista and their new Office suite are slow on the
uptake. But they still get all the new computer sales, Vista or XP. If they
can solve their security problems, they may be home free.

8. But the ISO vote is a victory. It brings hope for a free and better
internet. The keys appear to be education and an appeal to people's
intelligence. Standing up for the truth is not enough in the face of
overwhelming resources, but it is essential. Dell has created a chink in the
wall, OLPC is launched, Linux is growing, ISO didn't cave in.... enjoy the day.

---
webster


© 2007 Monopoly Corporation. ALL rights reserved. Yours included.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Doesn't NYT MS version of theur paper?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 08:57 PM EDT
I could very well be confused but doesn't the NYT offer a version of the NYT in
MS format for those on the go. I know for a long time I could not access their
site with Firefox. It could be the WSJ, memory is good, just short.

[ Reply to This | # ]

IBM's role
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 04 2007 @ 08:59 PM EDT

I saw some fleeting references to IBM in the European
contests, so I keep hoping IBM will act openly if it has to.
This would mean legal actions against Microsoft, either
directly or through anti-trust complaints to other governments
or some other indirect measure, when the time is right.

I have a hard time believing IBM will just roll over for OOXML.

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • IBM's role - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, September 05 2007 @ 10:00 AM EDT
The results of the ISO voting: Office Open XML is Disapproved - Updated: It's Official
Authored by: mrcreosote on Wednesday, September 05 2007 @ 03:22 AM EDT
If Microsoft were proposing a standard for the internal combustion engine, they
would have included every design feature all the way back to Gottlieb Daimler
for the sake of 'backwards compatibility'

---
----------
mrcreosote

[ Reply to This | # ]

The ISO press release is notable for what it does NOT say
Authored by: DaveJakeman on Wednesday, September 05 2007 @ 04:54 AM EDT
It mentions nothing about the attempted gross corruption of this process.

---
Only two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity – and I'm not
sure about the former. -- Einstein

[ Reply to This | # ]

OOXML opponents can't afford to sit still
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, September 05 2007 @ 12:28 PM EDT
Microsoft will keep working hard to get OOXML approved right through the BRM in
the spring. Opponents must do the same in the meantime.

ISO's reputation is already badly damaged by the MS hijinx. One approach would
be for countries to insist that this wannabe standard be thrown off the
"Fast Track" process, since in hindsight it obviously didn't qualify.
Also, ISO should insist on tightening up procedures in general so that its
decisions reflect the needs of <i>all member countries</i> not the
needs of <i>one multinational corporation</i>. Probably the national
bodies of countries that voted "NO" would be properly motivated to try
these measures. If ISO doesn't show a willingness to initiate a cleanup
immediately, maybe the "NO" side should consider resorting to dirty
methods too. There is a slippery slope, of course, but well-heeled opponents of
OOXML could try to buy the national bodies of countries that are "for
sale", just like Microsoft does.

Meanwhile, the FOSS commmunity must keep exposing flaws in OOXML and in
Microsoft's justification for standardizing it. In the latter category, note the
following inconsistency in the Microsoft story: If the purpose of the standard
is to provide a way of storing legacy documents from proprietary binary formats,
as claimed by MS, then: (1) Why does it need any unspecified extensions at all?
Microsoft should be able to lay down the entire spec now; and (2) They should
still implement ODF natively in their products for future documents. The answer
of course is obvious: the standardization of OOXML is all about lock-in to
secure Microsoft's revenue stream; it has nothing to do with serving customers'
needs.

[ Reply to This | # ]

All the good OOXML would have done...
Authored by: cjk fossman on Wednesday, September 05 2007 @ 12:50 PM EDT
...for ISO. Now they charge five to ten bucks a page for standards. Think what
they could do with a 6,000 page monster. Even with quantity discounts, they
would have been able to peddle them for kilobucks a copy.

And don't forget the consultants! If you think ISO 9000 spawned a load of
consultants, books and guides, just consider what the OOXML standard might have
done! It's so much longer and more complicated than ISO 9000. Surely people
will need hordes of learned professionals to explain it to them!

Why, heck, this one document alone could have started start an economic
landslide!

</sarcasm>

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )