The Inside Story on Norway's Yes to OOXML 254
Steve Pepper writes "The former Chairman of the Norwegian ISO committee, who resigned two weeks ago in protest against his country's vote of Yes to OOXML, tells the inside story of how the decision was reached: how a single bureaucrat from Standards Norway sidelined the overwhelming majority of Norwegian technical experts and changed Norway's vote from No to Yes. The story is so surreal it's hard to believe." It's as depressing as it is brief.
Coincidentally (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Coincidentally (Score:5, Funny)
Three Line Novel (Score:5, Funny)
"NO! One expects Les Nessman!"
They bundle up Eugene and haul him off to stunned looks from all present.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Further coverage (Score:5, Informative)
What can be done now? (Score:5, Interesting)
- demonstrations? This is what happened in Norway. Sure it would be good to have them elsewhere.
- Virgils? this is what happened in India and almost on the same level.
- moving on a building teams to stifle OOXML adoption by national governments as their standard
- ???
Re:What can be done now? (Score:5, Funny)
- demonstrations? This is what happened in Norway. Sure it would be good to have them elsewhere.
- Virgils? this is what happened in India and almost on the same level.
- moving on a building teams to stifle OOXML adoption by national governments as their standard
- ???
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I suspect the FCC Chairman used similar tactics in order to push-thru HDTV and HD Radio even though most engineers/technicians objected that the system had serious flaws (especially in the latter case of HD Radio).
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Nothing needs to be done (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Nothing needs to be done (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Nothing needs to be done (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Nothing needs to be done (Score:4, Informative)
And, really, the US military does this multiple supplier requirement for hardware only.. they dabbled with it on the software side with the POSIX requirements, but that's about it.
Re:Nothing needs to be done (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Nothing needs to be done (Score:4, Interesting)
But if, in the end, there's no real need for their documents to be stored in open formats then the only people who really care that the are stored in these formats are shills.
Re:Nothing needs to be done (Score:4, Funny)
If any government were inclined to bork at OOXML, the Swedish government would be first on the list.
Re:Nothing needs to be done (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Nothing needs to be done (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm still trying to decide if you're just a Microsoft fanboy, or an actual shill.
Re:Nothing needs to be done (Score:4, Informative)
Huh, I didn't know that "open source programmers" == "GPL". There are many OSI licenses that ARE compatible with OOXML even if GPL is not. And I don't concede your point even regarding GPL, since Gnumeric implements OOXML with GPL code.
"As well, the patent situation is another large roadblock for open source (not to mention anyone else). So really, not just anyone can use it."
The patent provisions are the same as for ODF.
Jason Matusow has recently posted two blog entries regarding the IP issues regarding OOXML (and compares it with ODF, PDF, etc), which are very good reads. (Yes, he works for Microsoft, so you might just dismiss him as a liar, but if you're willing to read Rob Weir and Groklaw, and take what they have to say as unquestioned Gospel, you might want to at least take a look what the other side has to say; if anything it'll make your own arguments stronger in the future.)
More Open XML Discussion - more misunderstandings about standards and IP [msdn.com]
IP, RAND, Standards, OSP, ISP - the conversation continues... [msdn.com]
Here's an excerpt from the first blog entry:
The ISO/IEC JTC 1 patent policy is applied uniformly to all standards in the ISO/IEC JTC 1 arena. The idea that the RAND declaration regarding Open XML is any different than a RAND declaration for ODF or for any other ISO Standard (such as...oh I don't know...how about PDF just for fun. Remember the huge list of patents that Adobe used to put on the welcome screen of the Acrobat reader alone?). The terms provided for the Microsoft patents in Open XML are legally irrevocable. They are global. Since they are broader than the RAND declaration for JTC 1, the attempt at FUD by the Groklaw post should be recognized for what it is...FUD.
Incidentally, both of the above blog entries point out that Linux distros already ship software under licenses that are incompatible with each other, making today's Linux distros technically illegal already. In the second blog entry, Jason goes on to say regarding this:
Legal snags like the ones I mentioned only matter if someone presses it in a court case. No one can say if these issues will ever become an issue but that has never stopped a single person from using Linux. So, when people then say that the MS OSP, or IBM's ISP, or RAND terms, or whatever means that Free Software developers can't develop something, I find it hard to take seriously when the intent, and all of the materials surrounding these actions speak of building bridges and enabling...not shutting down or threatening. Those same developers are willing to take those exact same issues as no concern on one hand and then scream foul on the other.
(BTW, regarding the GPL, I'll quote a comment made by 'hAL' to the second blog entry:
"Both the 'Interoperability Specification Pledge' from IBM (on for instance ODF v1.0/v1.1) and Suns 'Covenant Not to Sue' suffer from the same issue with GPL as Microsofts OSP licensing. GPL3 code can be reused outside the limits of those RAND licenses. Any patent protection by IBM and Sun on OpenDocument and from Micrsoft on OOXML will not apply if the GPL code is reused in a project that does not fall under those licenses. As Suns covenant only applies to OpenDocument reuse of patent protected code from an ODF code for anything else but an ODF implementation voids the covenant.")
Anyway, the post to which I replied talked of nobody being able to implement OOXML support besides Microsoft. He didn't say anything about "open source programmers", let alone "GPL". As long as there are other OOXML programs, even if they are closed source programs, ta
Re:Nothing needs to be done (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Nothing needs to be done (Score:4, Informative)
I can't believe I have to explain this.
Re:Nothing needs to be done (Score:5, Insightful)
Only on the same hardware platform and guaranteed only on the exact same version of Windows.
If Microsoft decides to discontinue OOXML and releases a new version of Windows that is incompatible with the OOXML SDK, you will have to re-implement the SDK yourself to allow its use on the new version of Windows. Or even worse, Microsoft just decides to discontinue the SDK without notice while still keeping OOXML within MS Office.
Using the SDK means that your application is completely on Microsoft's terms, complying fully with their licensing requirements for this SDK and you are fully at their mercy when it comes to releases of the SDK.
If you are releasing a competing software package to MS Office, you will not want to leave this much power with your competition.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Licensing is a separate issue, and I won't discuss it, since I have not read the OOXML licenses. But, Microsoft is generally very permissive with software made with their SDKs - "Developers developers developers!" You think I send Microsoft a check every time I #include <windows.h>?
As for SDK support on later versions of Windows? Until Vista, you could still call 16-bit memory locking routines. Not that they'd do much, but your Windows 3.11 code would still compile without much porting (dependin
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm a developer, and I was even a Microsoft developer until '02, when realised just how little people like me mattered to them.
I've tried implementing both ODF and OOXML in the tool I provide to my clients. I can tell you that experience meant I felt physically sick when I heard OOXML had been adopted as an ISO standard.
Whom to trust? (Score:3, Informative)
Looks like we have to do a bit of research ourselves. As in ;-)
-is the standard reasonably complete and concise? By most accounts, OOXML fails there but ODF looks better. That could be a reason to pick ODF if YOU have to support it
-is it actually supported? For both formats, there appears to be some support. See
htt [opendocume...owship.com]
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
http://www.iso.org/iso/store/shopping_faqs.htm#shop-online [iso.org]
Re:Nothing needs to be done (Score:4, Insightful)
I would even risk to say they win _more_ by discrediting ISO than by winning approval on one and only one standard.
Another direction (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Norway had very low perceived corruption (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes... excellent. Smithers! Summon the undead Greek poets!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yes... excellent. Smithers! Summon the undead Greek poets!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, even more specifically, he was from the village of Andes, near the city of Mantua. Is someone going to come up with the name of the street next? His family tree?
The point is that he was a Roman, rather than a Greek... or a Thunderbirds character.
Virgils? (Score:2)
Hmmm, no mention of India there.
(sorry, couldn't resist a bit of Sunday night snarkiness.)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The real question for me is what can be done now?
Not much, because the anti-OOXML side lost too much credibility when they decided to go with FUD instead of purely technical arguments. For example, they slammed OOXML because it only gave the names of the hash algorithms that were allowed for password hashing, rather than actually specifying those algorithms. Yet ODF doesn't even give the names. All it says is that you should use password hashing. No mention of the allowed algorithms. No mention of how to note in the document what algorithm was used.
Re:What can be done now? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What can be done now? (Score:5, Funny)
This is what is meant by "Democracy" these days. (Score:2, Insightful)
It's Dick Cheney's world, were just living on it - til' he needs to wipe us off.
Microsoft is just another example of the American disease that typifies their culture. By culture, I refer to something that can be grown, in a petrie dish. The American metaphor is that of the cancer, metastatic, it devours everything it can - demolishing its own food supply. Microsoft represents the apotheosis of this "culture" in commerce - as the Rep/Dem political duopoly of endless war represents this in the
Re:This is what is meant by "Democracy" these days (Score:4, Funny)
Glad to see you're not, like, bummed out, or something, dude.
Re:This is what is meant by "Democracy" these days (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I get it: government context.
Re:What can be done now? (Score:4, Insightful)
C. Push for a standards body that can't be bought by the highest bidder. Then call for the dissolution of the ISO.
I've thought an awful lot of ISO standards were a joke before. They seem to be more interested in codifying whatever is already being used---no matter how awful---than in actually coming up with standards that are in any way useful. This just confirmed that opinion beyond reasonable doubt....
Frankly, it makes me wonder how much corruption has gone unnoticed in previous ISO standards simply because it was not as blatant....
Just my $0.02.
Re:What can be done now? (Score:4, Insightful)
- A complete test suite for judging compliance.
- Two independent (no shared code) implementations.
- One of the implementations to be under a license no more strict than the revised BSD license, and ideally in the public domain.
Then, Microsoft could buy OOXML by 'simply' documenting enough behaviour that it is possible to implement it, writing a set of conformance tests, and funding the development of an open source competitor.Odd... (Score:5, Funny)
After the vote, did the bureaucrat jump up and starting dancing like a monkey?
After the vote did the bureaucrat start throwing chairs around?
Did the bureaucrat appear slightly chubby and a whole lot balding?
If the answer to any of the above is yes, I might be able to shed some insight on this...
Re: (Score:2)
The weirdest thing was when I marched around the stage chanting, "Bureaucrats! Bureaucrats! Bureaucrats! Bureaucrats!"
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
this guy here [youtube.com]
His story (Score:2)
It is not impartial."
Thank you for your honesty.
Yes, but he is honest. (Score:2, Insightful)
He's been doing the same thing for 13 years before this outrage convinced him to retire. The man's reputation and belief in fair process are as clear as the abuse he relates. The story can non be told any other way.
Depressing BUT brief... (Score:2)
ISO corruption (Score:5, Insightful)
Word of advice to ISO: head in the sand is not going to help!!
Re:ISO corruption (Score:5, Interesting)
In most other situations we would call for a 'do over' or call it a false start or some other phrase that describe how wrong and generally unfair it was.
Time for a do-over rule.
Re:ISO corruption (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
"John Sculley ruined Apple and he ruined it by bringing a set of values to the top of Apple which were corrupt and corrupted some of the top people who were there, drove out some of the ones who were not corruptible, and brought in more corrupt ones and paid themselves collectively tens of millions of dollars and cared more about their own glory and wealth than they did about what built Apple in the first place - which was making great computers for people to use."
What do you
How Microsoft corrupts the world... (Score:5, Funny)
In this case, a meatspace seg fault. The MCP is getting more powerful. We need a heroic Program to save us all.
Follow the money (Score:2)
Surreal? Yes. Over? No.
Standards Norway's own words (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.standard.no/pronorm-3/data/f/0/18/67/6_2401_0/2008-04-01_Standards_Norway_handling_of_the_OOXML_voting_in_ISO__3.pdf [standard.no]
Re:Standards Norway's own words (Score:5, Informative)
Interesting Container That Came In (Score:2)
Re:Standards Norway's own words (Score:5, Insightful)
The delusional hubris of a (European standards group) bureaucrat that they can somehow "control" or "improve" (shit - "influence in any non-quantum way") Microsoft's behavior just makes me groan.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's a standard. It should be done before it gets ISO'd. Not the other way around, and especially not as the main reason: "Let's certify this SO it can be improved."
At the same time in a galaxy far, far away.... (Score:2, Interesting)
[Senate fills with enormous applause]
Padmé: [to Bail Organa] So this is how liberty dies... with thunderous applause.
Re: (Score:2)
So what's new? (Score:5, Interesting)
Many (if not most) similar committees and associations are made up not of the right people for the job, but instead those that were corralled into the positions or couldn't find anything better.
On the other hand, Microsoft's primary goal is to maintain their privileged monopoly wherever and however possible. I actually had an eerie conversation with a Microsoft paralegal, who described her job as "palm-greasing officials in the Asian market". She also described how the executive were no longer concerned with making money, "they're in a position to change the world". I asked her what level of government they planned to get elected, and she replied, "why would they run for office? That would be a demotion!" And that was almost 10 years ago.
Assuming she was giving a truthful account, and her office was directly below Bill Gates, so I imagine she does know what goes on, the Microsoft executive believe that since power is available to them, they are entitled to use their influence wherever and however possible, and that their ability to do so justifies itself.
So show me a group of vigilante multi-billionaires and I'll show you dozens of half-witted committees that bend to their will, despite overwhelming reasoning to do otherwise.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Many (if not most) similar committees and associations are made up not of the right people for the job, but instead those that were corralled into the positions or couldn't find anything better.
On the other hand, Microsoft's primary goal is to maintain their privileged monopoly wherever and however possible. I actually had an eerie conversation with a Microsoft paralegal, who described her job as "palm-greasing officials in the Asian market". She also described how the executive were no longer concerned with making money, "they're in a position to change the world". I asked her what level of government they planned to get elected, and she replied, "why would they run for office? That would be a demotion!" And that was almost 10 years ago.
Assuming she was giving a truthful account, and her office was directly below Bill Gates, so I imagine she does know what goes on, the Microsoft executive believe that since power is available to them, they are entitled to use their influence wherever and however possible, and that their ability to do so justifies itself.
So show me a group of vigilante multi-billionaires and I'll show you dozens of half-witted committees that bend to their will, despite overwhelming reasoning to do otherwise.
Much of me wishes MS the very best of the best in these endeavors. No, seriously.
Because I really don't feel like we (the US) have a final trump card (nukes don't count) we could use if we absolutely needed to, should it no longer be in China's best interests to keep the USA in their back pocket. Say, when their economy no longer needs ours to keep theirs employed. I don't think our politicians will have the guts to sanction China before it's too late. So at this time, when they no longer need us, I imagi
wound it be ironic if (Score:2)
Re:wound it be ironic if (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Voting no would have lost them the furniture deal, but voting yes would not have increase furniture sales, its all falling into place now.
alternatives.. (Score:5, Interesting)
The best idea I came up with was a standard body for GPL standards based around something like sourceforge.
If people are familier with wide band delphi estimation then this next bit might sound familiar.
Everybody on sourgeforge has a rating determined by amount of code submitted, and any peer review ratings on their code - this then gives them a weighting value for voting. The more technical they are, the more code they submit the higher their rating is. Everybody can then vote on their amendments or proposals for standards and a moderation scheme would run to promote or demote comments based on their ratings. Changes can then be voted in or removed democratically and the best ideas would naturally float up.
The advantages are:-
1. very large audience peer review of any standard
2. best ideas automatically promoted (even if you are a newbie reviewer if you have a good idea then it should gather momemtum of its own and be promoted)
3. system automatically handles voting, promotion, weighting scale and is therefore impartial arbiter.
4. transparency accross the board, everybody can see how the system works
5. if anybody wants to become more influential then they have to donate more source code to be a prolific reviewer. Everybody benefits.
Ok that is an isolated example, and I chose sourceforge as a well known example.
For standards instead of source there would need to be some changes obviously.
But in this day and age, agreeing on a technical international standard seems an excellent candidate for a web based system. In reviewing this kind of thing I have always thought the more the merrier.
Anyhow, only an idea, a pipe dream really.
I now await the
(I also wondered on how the voting would of turned out if the current provess was peer reviewed - i.e. filmed and distributed for all to see on the standards websites.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:alternatives.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Even then, if 5000 MS coders blatantly write and approve each other how would you propose to handle it?
I suspect the answer here is "Write up what is actually being implemented into an RFC. Any RFC that can't be understood clearly and implemented will be dev nulled." Since many of us are already disregarding the ISO over this, I suppose that is happening already..........
Mod parent insightful (Score:2)
Exactly. The GP advocates a
(x) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante
approach to fighting corruption....
Re: (Score:2)
But I suppose that could be corrected with a bottom weighted moderation system to discourage back rubbing exchanges.
Same happened in Sri Lanka (Score:4, Interesting)
Thanks OOXML, You have given us hope. (Score:4, Interesting)
This was never the case people!!
This kind of manipulation is as old as the voting system itself. It is possible, it works, and there are some who are extremely good at it. And until yesterday, they could easily get away with it as long as the press didn't side against them. Now, we don't even need the press. We no longer depend on journalists to tell us the story. Whistleblowers no longer wish to remain anonymous, and when an insider demonstrates wrong doing, we listen, we act, and we revolt.
It is only a matter of time before bloggers reach critical mass in politics and everywhere else.
I cannot wait for the day our president is a blogger.
Re: (Score:2)
Dude, I'd be watching out from now on. When you make a challenge like that, you risk your life every time you walk under an open window.
Re: (Score:2)
From where I sit, this whole thing is about doing what is right and proper for both honest business and society... not about doing what will make your personal butt-buddies the most money. Microsoft and friends have been acting one way; the trend has been going the other. The choice seems pretty clear to me, but nobody can make your mind up for you. You have to do that yourself.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:You are at fault. (Score:4, Informative)
Perhaps you don't know that they exist?
I admit it. I am partly respoinsible for this. (Score:2)
When deciding to buy Office in order to get my business critical information I should have considered the optiona: a) Not buy office b) go out of busiess due to not being able to get the information that I need in order to operate.
I use NeoOffice [neooffice.org], the native Mac port of OpenOffice.org, which is a couple of versions behind OO.org and I haven't had any trouble opening Office 2007 documents and I've opened up several of them. Now whether it can handle macros I don't know as I don't know if any the docs had
I was kind of puzzled (Score:2, Insightful)
It said there were 2 for and 2 against, and about 80% of the people couldn't reach a consensus (sorry folks, 80% saying they could not find a consensus is not the same thing as a consensus against OOXML). Now it doesn't surprise me that a bunch of computer experts in a room couldn't reach a consensus. Getting any computer people to agree on something is like herding cats... it is very difficult. But maybe that is a lesson for people. Some times you have to agree on something. I don't think there is any
Re:I was kind of puzzled (Score:5, Informative)
It wasn't 2 people for and 2 people against. They reached a consensus that 2 of the comments had been satisfactorily resolved and that 2 of the comments hadn't been satisfactorily resolved. They then couldn't come to a consensus on whether the remaining 8 comments were resolved. The 80% number was the number of people that were not satisfied enough to vote yes.
They had agreed that 2 of their comments were not satisfactorily resolved. Which way the remaining 8 comments fell could only increase this number. Roughly 80% of those present didn't want to vote yes.
The final change to yes came down to one man, who seems to have had his mind made up ahead of time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I was kind of puzzled (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, in a prefect world, NO VOTING would result in NO ACTION. But the world isn't perfect. So, since the world isn't perfect, this time (and others) NO VOTING resulted in a BASTARDIZED PROCESS. Do you see that? Do you see why future committees might want to consider this when they unwisely decide not to decide? This reality is what the OP is trying to describe (or rather, successfully describing). Remember, it does not matter how the world should be, it only matters how the world really is. That is the mess
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Essentially the system is set up so that the employees can overrun their technical committee at any time. Having at least a one or two members refusing to go along with the vast majority jus
Re: (Score:2)
So then, why did not the 80% form a consensus that they should vote 'no'? Saying that they were not satisfied enough to vote 'yes', does not mean they vote 'no'. There is no such thing as an 'implicit no'. (...) Flamebait?... whatever.
Just curious, do you apply this policy to rest of your life too? If you ask ten of your friends to go on a holiday, two say yes and the other eight are uncertain do you book a holiday for ten? And that drunk girl you met at the bar, well she didn't say yes but there's no such thing as an implicit no... One thing is decisions where we must go for either A or B, but this is a case of do or don't. If you don't get consensus for change then status quo is preserved. That is unless a wiseass like yourself tries
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
So what happened is for 2 of the articles, everybody agreed yes. For 2 of them everybody agreed no. For the remaining 6 not everybody agreed. According to the article the writer thought they were 80% no and 20% yes on these.
Reading comprehension is your friend.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Dear moderators: Please mod parent out of flamebait. Here is why: parent is absolutely correct. As we will witness (and have witnessed), every "committee" who is asked to ratify or reject OOXML is going to be unable to reach a consensus because the standard is flawed. Then, some purchased politician is going to declare the standard accepted despite the committee's protestations and hesitations (the latter will be fatal). Then we are going to see a bunch of hullabaloo on slashdot where people wonder aloud ho
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
4/20 may be funny, but I cannot imagine what it has to do with Norway or OOXML.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There are also claims that it is impossible to implement the standard without using patented or copyrighted software owned by Microsoft.