ISO Recommends Denying OOXML Appeals 203
An anonymous reader passes along word that ISO has responded to the four appeals filed against the approval of OOXML as a standard. To no one's surprise, ISO says that there was nothing wrong with the process. Groklaw's coverage is (as usual) the most comprehensive. Andy Updegrove summarizes ISO's position this way: "1. All judgments made during the course of the process were appropriately made under the applicable Directives. 2. The fact that the BRM voted on all proposed resolutions in some fashion satisfies the requirements of the Directives. 3. The fact that a sufficient percentage of National Bodies (NBs) ultimately voted to approve DIS 29500 ratifies the process and any flaws in that process. 4. Many objections, regardless of their merits, are irrelevant to the appeals process."
Does it matter (Score:3, Interesting)
How does it matter whether OOXML is an ISO standard or not. No real world implementation exists, so anyone who wants to actually use a standard is still going to have to use ODF.
On the plus side.. (Score:4, Interesting)
I can demand that all clown shoes must be measured in cubits and have it made the clown shoe standard. That doesn't mean people will use it.
Time to move away from standards bodies... (Score:4, Interesting)
I think instead of having standards bodies, perhaps we should just say, defacto, that the open source application that manages an open document is in fact the reference implementation. It has all the knowledge in code, for public display and re-use, and that's way better than mere requirements. Like, I'm a total Windows bigot, but I do more C++ on Linux and I now expect that Visual C++ should actually perform the same way that GNU does, rather than vice versa, because I trust GNU more.
Re:ISO has failed (Score:4, Interesting)
It's quite a silly thing to get all ruffled up about. So what if it's a standard? Yea, it probably should not be, and people probably did get paid off, but the ISO is not a defender of freedom for uber-geeks, they are a standards organization, and overall they do a very good job (compare them to ICANN for instance). Get over it man, it's not a big deal. There are bigger things in life to get miffed about.
Yah, it isn't going to be bad at all whenever we turn to paperless filing for things and the government uses crappy "standards" like this and anyone who doesn't use whatever the "standard" implementation is, can't file something such as taxes.
Is it still a standard... (Score:4, Interesting)
What does this say about ISO Standards when their decisions are rejected by the community at-large?
Nothing wrong with the process? (Score:4, Interesting)
Well, at this point all I can say is fsck ISO. And I think that's the general feeling of many in the IT right now. That's going to have some consequences - like, ISO standards not being worth the paper they're written on, for example.
Re:zz (Score:3, Interesting)
MS - because this has all come out in the wash, they are going ODF anyhow and its made them look daft for not even using their own standard. I mean, how could they now?
We don't know what Microsoft's endgame is here. They might implement ODF in a buggy, half-assed manor, argue that it's because ODF is a sub-standard format, and then say, "Hmmm.... I guess we need to find a new format. Luckily, we have another ISO standard all ready to go!"
It could all just be a PR play so they can claim, "We tried to do what those FOSS fanatics wanted, but gave up when we realized how awful the format is. Those guys just can't be satisfied!"
In other words... (Score:3, Interesting)
It seems kind of odd to me that certain members of the ISO are fighting so hard to defend their questionable actions during the process. Could it be they are afraid of what may surface during an investigation of what really happened? Could it be they are afraid of what they might lose if it's overturned? Just curious...
You've got it almost exactly backwards... (Score:3, Interesting)
In practice though, it's really hard to do this - I used to know someone who spent a long time doing a real ISO reference C compiler. (Standards are mind numbing stuff - particularly the corner cases).
Andy
Welcome to the Real World (TM) (Score:3, Interesting)
Before the first time I ever participated in a "standards body", I thought that the committees consisted of really smart technical people gathering together to figure out what was best for the industry at large. How naive!
Then came the rude awakening: The committees are almost entirely comprised of representatives (who often reflect minimal technical expertise in the domain of interest) of the major commercial players in the industry. Each of the reps does whatever he/she can to promote his/her constituent employer's stance on each and every detailed issue, without regard for ethics, and with no regard whatsoever to what is "best" for the industry at large. Buying votes is certainly considered within the pale, in these contexts.
Consequently, the only standards I can respect are the RFCs published by the IETF, for 2 major reasons:
Re:Damage done to ISO and Commercial Standards. (Score:2, Interesting)
I am primarily a user of Microsoft products, which I enjoy using very much. Things like Visual Studio, the .NET framework, PowerShell and their server products are excellent, regardless of the infantile FUD and lame jokes people here on Slashdot (and most everywhere) seem to like so much.
I'm also a user and supporter of open source and free software (whatever incarnation those take in a particular piece of software). I spend large amounts of time writing Python code in Vim, and deploying it to my Slice [slicehost.com] to run in Apache and Postgresql. My primary browser is Firefox. I donate quarterly to the charity supported by the Vim project, I donated to the Mozilla foundation before they started raking up the millions, and I've given probably upwards of $1,000 in the past two years through the SourceForge donation system to projects like CDex, WinMerge, FileZilla, InkScape and others.
I believe FOSS is pretty much the only thing that will manage to keep Microsoft on their toes. Firefox did a fantastic job of proving that you can whip Microsoft out of their self-imposed stagnation, which results in competition and better software for everyone, regardless of whether the source is available or not, and whether or not I have to pay for it.
But people like you (and twitter, who started this thread with one of his 12 sockpuppets) are probably what is holding back FOSS the most. You, and your proclivity to flood the internet with your foolish conspiracy theories, badly-masked hatred and creative spelling. You, the armchair advocates and Monday morning advocates who have probably never written a single line of code in their lives, never submitted a bug, never updated a documentation wiki, never donated to a project and in general never did anything worthwhile because you're too busy screaming and demanding that everyone should hate Microsoft with the same zeal as you do.
If you are advocating the destruction of Microsoft, I'm sorry but that makes you my enemy. Not because I'm in love with them, but because I don't buy that "choice" you are pushing on people. And unfortunately that attitude comes from the top, from the FSF's FUD campaigns to Stallman's stupid edicts and pulpit flames. They also happen to think creative spelling is clever, and seem to use it to try to get their point across at any opportunity.
I admire people like Bram Molenaar, Guido van Rossum and thousands of others - seen and unseen - who are out there heads down writing code and contributing to FOSS every day. People who don't demean themselves or the people who look to them by engaging in activities that are nothing more than a puerile religious crusade.
It is interesting that you mention the "community". It has always seemed to me that the "community" exists only when the point is to hate a corporation. The rest of the time it looks like a bunch of bickering groups that hardly get along with each other because their leaders have decreed that some software license is incompatible with another. That's probably where the term "open sores" comes from. And you don't mind people calling it "open sores", right?
OOXML will *become* a requirement (Score:3, Interesting)
1) Governments will have to use an ISO approved standard, to make sure their documents can be exchanged, and that their documents will be readable in the future.
2) Since msft has a monopoly on office products, the ISO standard of choice is a foregone conclusion.
3) Anybody who does business with the governments will also have to use the OOXML standard. So those who do business with the governments will also standardize on OOXML. Those who business, with those who do business with governments, will also have to standardize on OOXML - and so on.
4) ODF will never have the slightest chance to get a toe-hold.
5) Msft wins again - QED.