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

DIN responds to "incorrect and misleading" reports

Din has posted a press release in both German "OOXML-Abstimmungen: Gegenstand und Ergebnisse", and in English "OOXML voting: issues and results":-

Here's an unofficial translation a colleague sent to me (thanks to those who are making improvement suggestions in the comments. If an official translation is posted I will update):-

The reports currently circulating the Internet regarding voting procedures in DIN's Standards Committee on Information Technology and Selected IT Applications (NIA) on ISO/IEC DIS 29500 "Office Open XML file formats" are false and misleading.

On 11 March 2008 the NIA working committee responsible for technical aspects of ISO/IEC DIS 29500 held a vote to decide whether the "YES with comments" vote of September 2007 should be maintained as a "YES" vote or changed to a "NO" vote, taking the results of the Ballot Resolution Meeting held in February as a basis for their decision. As correctly reported by an unofficial source, the result of the March 11 vote was 14 to 5 in favour of adopting ISO/IEC DIS 29500 as an ISO Standard. Only the external experts who make up the responsible working committee voted on this matter; DIN as such has no vote on technical content in working committees.
 
NIA's Steering Committee was NOT called upon to review, and possibly override, the working committee's technical decision - it does not have the authority to do so. It was, however, involved in a decision as to whether or not the voting procedure at ISO correctly adhered to the formal criteria. Because the Steering Committee's decision did not relate to any technical issues or the content of the standard itself, but dealt solely with the formalities of the JTC 1 "fast track" procedure, i.e. adherence to procedural rules in the standardization process, DIN felt it was necessary to take a position on this matter. This is the reason the DIN staff member participated in the voting procedure and did not abstain, as is the rule in questions of technical content.
 
On 27 March 2008 the NIA Steering Committee members who were entitled to vote did NOT vote on approval or non-approval of ISO/IEC DIS 29500 as an International Standard, but SOLELY on the regularity of the voting procedure itself. With a majority of 7 to 6, and 7 abstentions, the Steering Committee deemed the procedure as being in conformity with the rules, and thus had no reason to override the working committee's "YES" vote. Had the majority of the Steering Committee been convinced that the procedures for developing and voting on ISO/IEC DIS 29500 were in any way irregular, the German vote would have been changed to "ABSTAIN".
[07/04/08 Update - TÜV NORD have also now posted a comment about the German vote & process (my emphasis):-

Ecma Office Open XML adopted as ISO Standard: TÜV NORD and DIN cooperate successfully in the internationalisation standardization process

The International Standards Organization (ISO) today adopted the document format Ecma Office Open XML as an ISO Standard.

A week ago, the German standards organization Deutsche Institut für Normung (DIN) had finally confirmed its decision to uphold in the ISO voting procedure the resolution it had adopted in September 2007 agreeing to the recognition of Office Open XML as an International Standard.

“We are very pleased with this development,” said Gunnar Thaden, CIO of TÜV NORD. He explained that the adoption of the international standard Ecma Office Open XML as an ISO Standard would substantially enhance not only the free exchange of documents, but also the security of investment in IT applications. “This is good news especially for those users who in the past have relied predominantly on Microsoft’s “.doc” format,” Thadden went on. “I am glad that TÜV NORD, in close collaboration with DIN, has been able to contribute to this outcome. We will continue in future to make every effort, through DIN, to strengthen Germany’s voice in international standardization.”

International standards are very important in TÜV NORD’s work. Open file formats are a prerequisite for the unhindered exchange of documents across national boundaries and between vendor-specific solutions. They facilitate archiving and offer substantial potential for optimisation through the intermeshing of front office and back office solutions. This development will enable TÜV NORD to provide its services even more economically, both in Germany and abroad.

The international standardization process provides for opinion-forming on proposals for new standards to take place at national level in bodies known as “national mirror committees”. In the context of this procedure, TÜV NORD is involved in the Advisory Committee to DIN’s Standards Committee on Information Technology, and in the relevant mirror committees corresponding to important international technical committees such as NIA34, which is responsible for document formats.

At a meeting six months ago, the responsible committee within DIN’s Standards Committee on Information Technology and Applications (NIA) had already agreed, after months of intensive preparatory work and thorough and constructive discussion of the position papers submitted to it, to accept the draft ISO/IEC 29500 with comments. This meeting was attended by representatives of software providers, application developers, research institutes, ministries and government agencies.

In TÜV NORD’s view, the contributions made by the working committee led to a substantial enhancement in the quality of the standard. DIN’s experience in moderating such processes was of great importance, particularly in view of the fact that the area concerned is one in which conflicting interests are rife. The committee of technical experts reached consensus on most issues; the remaining matters were decided by majority vote, in accordance with a procedure governed by clear rules.

]

Comments

Mark said:

DIN appears to be responding to reports from some unreliable sources who have been quick to accuse: www.groklaw.net/article.php and www.consortiuminfo.org/.../article.php.

And even after the DIN statement, it seems these sources cannot accept that DIN knows more about their own rules and processes than they do.  Perhaps these sources are following this guide: www.durusau.net/.../standardsbehavior.pdf

# March 31, 2008 12:46 PM

Rob Brown said:

Hi Stephen,

The last paragraph should start "On March 27, 2008...". I was wondering why they were talking about year-old events!

# March 31, 2008 1:27 PM

Stephen McGibbon said:

:-) Well spotted Rob. The DIN article says "Am 27. März 2008 hatten" so I think it's a typo and I'll correct it now.

Thanks

# March 31, 2008 1:45 PM

hAl said:

It seems very rare that an ISO/SEC national standards organization reacts so angrily at these kind of publications.

They must be very annoyed to do this as you would normally expect DIN to stay far from this kind of opinion wars.

# March 31, 2008 2:31 PM

Gareth Horton said:

Stephen,

The last part-

"Wenn die Mehrheit des Lenkungsgremiums der Überzeugung gewesen wäre, dass der Prozess der Bearbeitung und der Abstimmung über ISO/IEC DIS 29500 regelwidrig verlaufen sei, dann wäre das deutsche Votum bei der ISO/IEC-Abstimmung auf Enthaltung geändert worden."

should read (slightly edited for clarity too):

"If the majority of the steering committee had been convinced that the process, the handling and the voting on ISO/IEC DIS 29500 had not complied with the rules, the German vote WOULD had been changed to abstention at the ISO/IEC vote."

Note the WOULD, that was missing.

As the Germans might say, everything was "Ordungsgemaess"

Gareth

# March 31, 2008 3:35 PM

Stephen McGibbon said:

Thanks Gareth, I've modified accordingly.

# March 31, 2008 3:43 PM

Stephen McGibbon said:

I've just updated the post with the official DIN statement in English and the link.

# March 31, 2008 4:07 PM

Franco Merletti said:

"With a majority of 7 to 6, and 7 abstentions, the Steering Committee deemed the procedure as being in conformity with the rules, and thus had no reason to override the working committee's "YES" vote. Had the majority of the Steering Committee been convinced that the procedures for developing and voting on ISO/IEC DIS 29500 were in any way irregular, the German vote would have been changed to "ABSTAIN"."

Shameful. 7 abstentions and 46% of people that thought this was an irregular process. The least that DIN should have done is abstained from voting and investigate what is happening.

Another political decision. Technical merits? no , thanks

And still there is no text of DIS 29500 to review and cast a proper vote. Microsoft is still changing conformance, schemas, normative text, XML, etc.

In 2008, this is how ISO is delivering IT standards to the world: ignoring any technical analysis and accountability in NB decisions, voting about non-existent text, leaving NB decisions on politicians ore on one-man committees ( Czech example ), rushing changes 30 days before the close of ballots ( most national bodies *didn't* review the 2000 pages of fixes proposed by ECMA ), etc. etc.

A clear Standards Process Abuse ( www.tbray.org/.../On-OOXML ).

In 2008 !!! We have learned nothing in all this years of computer history. Instead of work toward technical excellence we are standardizing internal products documentation, just to formally give them an ISO brand.

Sad day ... i'm disgusted to see what the world deserves today as ISO IT deliverables.

 Franco Merletti

# March 31, 2008 6:06 PM

Hassan said:

"Shameful. 7 abstentions and 46% of people that thought this was an irregular process. The least that DIN should have done is abstained from voting and investigate what is happening.

Another political decision. Technical merits? no , thanks"

So Franco, you support democracy when it goes your way and complains about it when it doesn't ? Doesn't sound like a very honest position if you want my opinion.

There was a democratic vote, the majority voted YES, you've just got to live with it buddy.

# March 31, 2008 8:51 PM

Franco Merletti said:

hassan, do you know the word consensus?

do you think that this is a game? the standard game?

this is about giving the world ( you and me ) usable and technical-sound specifications

if more than one people in a technical committee is saying to you: "i don't think this process is regular", you must stop the rush and see what is happening

See what Australia said ( www.standards.org.au/.../080331_Aust_maintains_abstain_position_on_OOXML.pdf ):

Other reasons to maintain the abstain position include:

  • Due to its length (6,000 pages) and complexity no full analysis of the implication of OOXML has been undertaken by relevant agencies;

  • Standards Australia is not satisfied that the ISO/IEC fast track process is suitable for a

proposal as large, complex and commercially sensitive; and

  • The recent BRM only addressed a small number of the issues raised by various member

countries. Standards Australia doesn’t believe sufficient progress was made to change its vote.

Why the rush ???????  

# April 1, 2008 1:12 AM

Open XML said:

Bon poisson d’avril de la part du site noooxml. “Confidential sources says that President Sarkozy has

# April 1, 2008 10:50 PM

Weblogul lui Zoli said:

Deși la votul din vara trecută nu a trecut, Open XML a fost de data asta ratificat ca International Standard

# April 2, 2008 5:46 PM