Notes2Self.net

Stephen McGibbon's Web Journal
Voices for Innovation is a global community working together to shape the technology policy debate. We want every voice heard. Join now and make a difference.

Recent comments

Reading

DIS 29500 Ballot Resolution Meeting

SC34 Secretariat Manager, Ken Holman has sent an email confirming the date and location of the DIS20500 Ballot Resolution Meeting :
A date and venue has been decided for the upcoming DIS 29500 Ballot Resolution Meeting:  the venue is the International Conference Centre Geneva http://www.cicg.ch/en/index.php and the dates are Monday to Friday February 25-29, 2008. More information will be published about the BRM at a future date, but for those who need to make plans early, this is the scheduled date and location of the meeting.

According to his blog, the UK's Alex Brown, Technical Director of Griffin Brown Digital Publishing Ltd had written some time ago that he had been appointed as the convenor :

I have been appointed by the SC 34 secretariat as the convenor of the up-coming Ballot Resolution Meeting on OOXML (should it happen). As with UK standardisation I am sure the key to success will be an ultra-conscientious application of the rules. I have made the JTC 1 Directives my constant companion and am working with SC 34 colleagues to make sure my understanding of them is complete.

I have received commiserations from several people on this appointment, and am assured it will be a very stressful experience. However, right now, I am glad to be relieved of the responsibility of having, or expressing, a technical opinion on OOXML, and am looking forward to being a neutral administrator of the standards process ...

I hear that IBM is still telling national bodies that a BRM isn't guaranteed. I am unsure how IBM reached that conclusion but this seems to be concrete evidence to the contrary.

Comments

Ed Brill said:

Stephen, it looks like Rob Weir has answered your closing comment at http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/08/ooxml-brm.html
# August 27, 2007 10:37 PM

Luc Bollen said:

According to the ISO rules, if the DIS 29500 proposal is not supported by 2/3 of the P-Members, the process is halted. In this case, there will be no BRM. This is confirmed by Alex Brown when he says "... the up-coming Ballot Resolution Meeting on OOXML (should it happen)". "Should it happen" seems to me that it is not garanteed.
# August 28, 2007 12:03 PM

Stephen McGibbon said:

Thanks Ed - I don't think he so much answers it as confirms it. DIS29500 is recieving a far more robust review than IS26300 ever did ... and will benefit from it I am sure. I think the fact that OASIS went along with the BRM being cancelled is indicative that thay knew there was so much more work to be done -  formulas, accessibility, interoperability support.

I guess IS26300 will get the same level of thoughtful and good faith review from IBM and supporters when it comes back to ISO for revision one day?

I understand that Ecma have confirmed that they expect there to be a BRM and will address all comments at it.

# August 28, 2007 2:26 PM

Bruce said:

Stephen: regarding "I think the fact that OASIS went along with the BRM being cancelled is indicative that thay knew there was so much more work to be done -  formulas, accessibility, interoperability support."

Are you serious, or just making up facts as you go? As Rob explained in his post, there was no BRM with ODF because the NBs unanimously approved it. There was nothing per se to "resolve"; it was accepted as is.

# August 28, 2007 4:10 PM

Stephen McGibbon said:

Bruce there were comments submitted with the yes votes.

# August 28, 2007 4:44 PM

Luc Bollen said:

Stephen, this is exactly what people having ISO experience like Rob Weir are telling continuously : in the ISO procedure, comments provided with a YES vote are simply that : comments. There is no need for a BRM to discuss them further.

If you WANT to make sure that your comments are taken into account, they MUST, according to the ISO rules, be part of a NO vote.

# August 29, 2007 12:28 AM

Luc Bollen said:

Oops... Forget my comment above about "if the DIS 29500 proposal is not supported by 2/3 of the P-Members, the process is halted. In this case, there will be no BRM."

Of course, there will be a BRM in this case.  I'm so amazed by the energy put by You-Know-Who to avoid NO votes, that finished to be confused about their motives.

The correct explanation is given by Rob Weir in www.robweir.com/.../ooxml-brm.html

# August 29, 2007 12:20 PM

Răzvan Sandu said:

Stephen,

I'm embarassed to say that, but you guys at Microsoft SIMPLY LIE , trying to thow as many smoke as you can over this debate, in the last minutes...

If one manage to read attentively all the TECHNICAL information given at:

http://www.noooxml.org

http://www.robweir.com/blog/

it will be clear as daylight that OOXML is a bad "standard", serving no one than Microsoft's international monopoly.

Corruption you've managed to induce in NBs like Sweden, Germany or Romania is simply outrageous - IMHO, it's nothing about technical standards, but about common law crimes...

Let me remind all people here that anti-trust cases against Microsoft are due to be reopened this fall, since the settlement period will expire:

en.wikipedia.org/.../United_States_v._Microsoft

en.wikipedia.org/.../European_Union_v._Microsoft

How do you think people all over the world will react, given the fact that Microsoft did NOTHING to comply with former Court's decisions and added this scandal about stuffing national ISO commitees ?

And there are HUGE fees for you from the European Union (millions of dollars A DAY)  ;-)

Răzvan

# August 31, 2007 12:06 PM

Stephen McGibbon said:

Hi Răzvan - I haven't lied, and I don't believe my colleagues have either.

As you appear to be Romanian, and are alleging corruption in Romania, perhaps you should do the responsible thing and report it to the correct authorities together with the factual evidence you have. If you are alleging wrongdoing on the part of Microsoft or its employees you might additionally wish to report it to Microsoft here. All Microsoft employees are required to annually accept Microsoft Standards of Business Conduct.

I think OpenXML is a good standard and certainly much better than ISO26300. IBM is opposed to OpenXML for commercial reasons, and acts as if only parties approved by IBM can participate in the standards process. However if Open Standards are going to be more important in the future, and I think they are, then there's going to be an increase in both the number of standards and the number of participants. I assume you consur with this view since both of the sites you link to encourage people to get involved and to influence the process.

As for the TECHNICAL reasons you cite - I haven't seen any arguments that in my view preclude OpenXML from being an ISO standard. There are however some improvements that can be made and I think you will find Ecma eager to undertake the associated work.

I suggest you study some other commentary as well as the sites you mention though to get the other side of the picture.

# August 31, 2007 1:23 PM

Răzvan Sandu said:

Hello, Stephen,

I case you or any of your colleagues can't find the TECHNICAL reasons why people dislike and reject OOXML, please allow me to point you in the right direction:

http://www.noooxml.org/argu-brief">www.noooxml.org/argu-brief

www.robweir.com/.../formula-for-failure.html

www.robweir.com/.../leap-back.html

Just a few of them...

Now, please take into consideration that our Holy Father, The Pope, is pretty old... Because of sadness, he may risk a heart attack if he learns that the Gregorian Calendar, in place since 1582, is unfaithfully contradicted by some barbarian guy at Microsoft. Or, if his librarian at Vatican informs him that The Algebra, old science of the Arabs, may become subject to "vote" in its most elementary rules...

So, for the sake of our Holy Father, even you, Great Microsoft, please admit our humbly opinion that 2+2 still makes 4, in any place in the world. This kind of rule is called - forgive us ! - "a standard". Please, please admit it, this time only, and let us live on the face of the Earth - we swear we will not contradict your rules again !

Humbly,

The rest of the Globe

P.S. Our National Standardisation Body is not more corrupt than the USA's. If you look at the map on http://www.noooxml.org, they are of the exact same colour. Red. Soviet red.

# September 3, 2007 7:10 PM

Notes2Self.net said:

Earlier today ISO issued a press release with the results of the DIS29500 ballot:- A ballot on whether

# September 4, 2007 10:19 PM

.: Stefan Gabriel Georgescu's blog :. said:

Earlier today ISO issued a press release with the results of the DIS29500 ballot:- A ballot on whether

# September 4, 2007 10:28 PM

Romeo Pruno said:

Riprendo il comunicato di ieri da parte di ISO (International Organization for Standardization) la quale

# September 5, 2007 2:44 PM

ExternalBlogs said:

Riprendo il comunicato di ieri da parte di ISO (International Organization for Standardization) la quale

# September 5, 2007 4:05 PM

Notes2Self.net said:

I noted a while back that the SC34 secretary had notified SC34 members of the date and location of the

# September 6, 2007 10:27 PM