ISO Puts OOXML On Hold 138
schliz alerts us that ISO, in response to the four appeals (Venezuela, India, Brazil, South Africa) filed in recent weeks, has put the OOXML standardization process on hold. Here is ISO's press release, which says that ISO/IEC DIS 29500 will not be published for at least "several months" while the appeals process goes forward.
Update: 06/11 10:13 GMT by KD : Reader Alsee points out that the fourth officially recognized appealing country is Venezuela, not Denmark as originally stated. The protests of Denmark and Norway are being disregarded, as they do not come from the administrative heads of their national organizations.
Update: 06/11 10:13 GMT by KD : Reader Alsee points out that the fourth officially recognized appealing country is Venezuela, not Denmark as originally stated. The protests of Denmark and Norway are being disregarded, as they do not come from the administrative heads of their national organizations.
Wow (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Wow (Score:5, Informative)
Minor correction. (Score:5, Insightful)
This could all be another fake "evaluation" like the others were.
Just because they appear to be going through the steps that they're required to
Until ISO can PUBLICLY state the errors that were made and WHO made those "errors" AND take action against those individuals they can not be trusted. Not even to follow the procedures that their own rules require of them.
They didn't follow them when they were fast-tracking this. There is no reason to believe that this time will be any different.
If only I could cry nonsense (Score:5, Insightful)
Mind you, if ISO is so vulnerable this does beg the question 'is it still relevant?'
Re:If only I could cry nonsense (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps not for you and me, but as long as people in decision-making positions consider "ISO standard" as relevant, it is automatically relevant.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:If only I could cry nonsense (Score:5, Insightful)
You can think of them as the tested minimum (with generous safety margins!) to meet certain criteria. So they're good as a guide, and non-experts will require the standards to be met to be able to 'certify' something as complete/fit for purpose/etc.
However, what's at stake is that it is now possible for 'you' to establish an ISO standard that only YOU are capable of implementing. It's not so much that this is a 'bad' standard, but that it's not a standard in anything other than name.
It shows that industry can control the standards process to their own benefit when it is supposed to be independent and neutral. So, you should have just listened to Microsoft in the first place and bought Office 20xx for the next 10 years because the rep TOLD YOU SO.
Re: (Score:2)
In Norway it has been decided that ODF will be the official format for delivering assignments at schools, to ensure that parents and students can make use of tools such as Open Office, since it does not require an increased financial commitment from parents. As purchasing MS Office would. Something I find to be a rational d
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
The public sector has those concerns too (especially accessibility wrt equality/human-rights), but it's also to do with not favouring one
Re:If only I could cry nonsense (Score:5, Funny)
When it comes to things that could save nation-states guhzillions of dollars and maybe use that money for something more important...
Steve Ballmer will throw a chair (metaphorically) at anyone who gets in the way of his profits.
Re:If only I could cry nonsense (Score:5, Insightful)
No it doesn't. It actually shows how badly needed it is. Otherwise MS wouldn't give a damn and you wouldn't either.
It does beg several questions though - e.g How can a rational and fair evaluation be assured? How can the decision making be improved, especially in some "underdeveloped" countries, but sadly also in many "developed" ones. How can the national bodies be hardened against lobbying?
Re:If only I could cry nonsense (Score:5, Funny)
Of course. Why, ISO is an ISO-9000-compliant organization!
I disagree. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:If only I could cry nonsense (Score:4, Insightful)
Read:
Embrace, extend, extinguish.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:If only I could cry nonsense (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Wow (Score:5, Informative)
Now Microsoft has a formal excuse for its lazyness to deliver the consolidated text. Blame ISO haha.
Re:Wow (Score:4, Interesting)
Exactly. And the OOXML standard has already been ratified by ECMA anyway, almost two years ago. There are so many standards that aren't followed, that one more or less really doesn't matter. ;-)
When I look at the C++ standard, or the POSIX standard -- they're used as guidance, but they aren't implemented by the word, because it's not always possible. The OOXML standard became obsolete the moment Office 2007 was brought to market.
Standards are often used as a sales argument, and I guess that's what Microsoft was trying to do. To be able to say: "We support standards!" :-D
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Wow (Score:5, Interesting)
There is only a faint glimmer of hope, a pinhole of light at the end of the tunnel.
Common misconception (Score:3, Funny)
That's not the end of the tunnel, that's just oncoming traffic.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
They also figured the Big Blue and Sun are very serious, it is not like couple of disgruntled nerds blogging. IBM is older than most of countries in ISO and Sun have huge expertise on how governments work too.
Re: (Score:1)
Owned (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
GREAT (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:GREAT (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it's safe to assume there will be no investigation or backlash. However if OOXML is ultimately rejected as a standard, then it would mean that the attempt to buy a standard failed, thanks to the pressure put on ISO by the states that participate, which ultimately stemmed from organizations in those states who saw what was happening and protested. It would mean that while the ISO process is vulnerable, it is possible to have oversight over its proceedings. No more just coasting and assuming anything that comes into ISO must be okay, but that's probably a good thing that should have been the case all along.
I'm not saying this will completely save ISO, but it could certainly help.
Re:GREAT (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nonsense.
Unfortunately, anything Microsoft spews out becomes a de facto standard in a few years' time anyway. No they're just making it formal.
Re: (Score:2)
Good job, mods.
This was a good counter-example, and not at all offtopic.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:GREAT (Score:5, Insightful)
This means that 1) ISO are giving Microsoft an unfair advantage over their competitors and 2) national bodies still can't comment on OOXML.
3 nations appealed out of 88. This is not cause for celebration or a sign that the process is OK. The ISO process is broken and the people who forced this standard through are still in power.
Simpsons reference (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Glad to hear of this decision from ISO. I wonder if MS was anticipating this all along, hence the fact ODF will be included in the next MS Office, while OOXML will not be.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
<nelson>Haha!</nelson>
Re: (Score:2)
For shame, sniping another man's mod points. Tsk tsk tsk.
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't that make it all the more low?
ISO standards themselves are closed! (Score:5, Insightful)
Just to get access to published standards themselves on http://www.iso.org/iso/store.htm costs easily $50 to $150 each! Can someone please tell me how that makes any sense at all? How can we have global standards if people can't afford to even read them? Am I the only one who thinks this might be a bit hypocritical?
--
Hey code monkey... learn digital electronics! [nerdkits.com]
Re:ISO standards themselves are closed! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:ISO standards themselves are closed! (Score:5, Informative)
The IEEE are just as bad. They charge an arm and a leg for every one of their standards. Just stick the thing up on the web, you cheap bastards.
Re: (Score:2)
Even worse... (Score:5, Insightful)
The net effect is that you can't be sure you're legally compliant unless you pay some private organization a tithe.
Re:Even worse... (Score:5, Informative)
I do agree though that this is less than ideal, but it is not quite as bad as your post makes it sound.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
150$ for a standard of socket sizes for light blubs is petty cash compared to cost of facilities needed to produce them.
Standards-(organisations) is still mostly concerned with manufacture of physical goods and their thinking heavily influenced by industrial era (as is most of society, most people have no clue what it means to live in the information age).
Re: (Score:2)
Thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster! (Score:4, Funny)
In His infinite Noodliness, the FSM touched the Microsoft midgit while he was composing the OOXML standard draft and put in all the spaghetti code and specifications, and is now laughing His Hallowed Noodles off.
hurrah! (Score:5, Insightful)
But I really hope that there has been enough of a back lash from the knowledgeable and enough of a crammed education on why this matters that this is now too high a profile for it to be swept under the rug.
Of course the downside of this whole fiasco is that there are now many, many more OOXML implementations out there and planned so this is hardly a complete bust for MS.
Still here's hoping that common sense prevails, and a bug grateful thank you for all those people who fought it.
Re:hurrah! (Score:5, Informative)
The "appeals" will be heard, but I'm not expecting a miracle here.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:hurrah! (Score:5, Interesting)
[corporate spin]Oh sure! MS Office 2010 was going to be fully open spec, but the ISO never got around to finalizing OOXML, and we got tired of waiting. So, Hey! Here's a new proprietary format. After all, it's not our fault, we upheld our part of the bargain and released the specs...[/corporate spin]
Re:hurrah! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:hurrah! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:hurrah! (Score:5, Insightful)
These people are the ones we need now more than ever. There is a good Steve Jobs quote that seems appropriate:
"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..."
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft are planning to implement ODF *before* they implement OOXML...
Pretty much everyone else has already implemented ODF...
Why would anyone consider using OOXML?
On Hold... (Score:5, Funny)
"No Microsoft product shall have the features promised or be released when scheduled".
So all of you cheering this decision are incredibly misguided. Look a little closer and you will see this is clearly evidence of more MS tampering in the process.
Norway set aside the comittees no, and said yes (Score:5, Interesting)
To everyones big suprise, the government set aside the No vote, and ruled by fiat that Norway would vote Yes.
But then again, why care about a petty little standard and some petty corruption when you can save the world.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
T: How are your kids? Are they going to summerschool?
B: Just fine, and yours?
T: I have some problems with Vista; do you have anyone I can call?
B: Sure, and Vista would probably work better if we got OOXML approved anyway. Be more open also.
T: Open is good.
Re: (Score:2)
After OOXML fails ISO (Score:5, Funny)
So, Bill, what are we going to do tonight?
Same thing we do every night, Stevie. Try to take over the world.
that's OK (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
The summary is impressive with inaccuracy (Score:4, Informative)
Four national standards body members of ISO and IEC - Brazil, India, South Africa and Venezuela - have submitted appeals against the recent approval of ISO/IEC DIS 29500, Information technology - Office Open XML formats, as an ISO/IEC International Standard.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What's a country worth? (Score:2, Interesting)
Interesting, if you're a country. "Unless you can find lobbying pals, we're not listening. Call back when you've garnered some support."
Is ISO afraid ? (Score:1, Interesting)
The ISO has ALWAYS been for sale (Score:1)
How do you think we ended up with this Gibibyte/Mebibyte nonsense?
I am suspicious about several ISO standards in the construction industry myself.
And ISO 9000 and company?
Denmark? (Score:1, Interesting)
"Four national standards body members of ISO and IEC - Brazil, India, South Africa and VENEZUELA - have submitted appeals against the recent approval of ISO/IEC DIS 29500 [...] as an ISO/IEC International Standard."
Summary:
"[...] ISO, in response to the four appeals (DENMARK, India, Brazil, South Arica) filed in recent weeks [...]"
Slashdot - as we know and love it.
Denmark did NOT protest! (Score:5, Informative)
Denmark did not protest, appeal, or in any way change its official vote. The official Danish ISO vote is controlled by Dansk Standard [www.ds.dk], who voted "Yes" in the final OOXML specification vote (after initially voting "No with comments").
The reason Denmark keeps sneaking into the list of countries who "appealed" is probably because a local pro-Open Source lobby organization named "Foreningen for Open Source Leverandører i Danmark" (OSL) (their name in English is "The Danish Open Source Business Association") has submitted a protest and that is by many people mistakenly translated into an "official appeal".
Since the protest is not submitted by Dansk Standard (who holds the official ISO vote) but is in fact from a local lobby organization, the vote can not be considered "official" in any way. And it is important to note in this context, that the official Danish vote is still "Yes".
The protest is available in Danish [osl.dk] on the OSL website and I also found a copy of the letter in English on Groklaw [groklaw.net] (its not on the OSL website for some reason). The original Groklaw artikle on the subject is here [groklaw.net], in case you want to read the comments yourself.
The complaint criticises both the way Dansk Standard handled the OOXML approval process and a few formal errors in the ISO process.
The story was first announced by Computer World Denmark [computerworld.dk] (Danish only, sorry). It was first mentioned on slashdot [slashdot.org] on June 1st where sadly it was also mistakenly described as an "official" protest.
- Jesper
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Since the protest is not submitted by Dansk Standard (who holds the official ISO vote) but is in fact from a local lobby organization, the vote can not be considered "official" in any way. And it is important to note in this context, that the official Danish vote is still "Yes".
Can you please explain what OSL has paid to goverment or any other organisation, etc... so they are lobby organization? Have they paid hundreds of thousands or millions to someone to get their mind turned what OSL wants?
Re: (Score:2)
Can you please explain what OSL has paid to goverment or any other organisation, etc... so they are lobby organization? Have they paid hundreds of thousands or millions to someone to get their mind turned what OSL wants?
You ask this qustion with, I believe, two wrong assumptions:
None of that is true.
Lobby activities are a part of any political landscape and it can be executed without money. Perhaps in the US the most successful lobbyists are using truckloads of money for bribes, expensive dinners, or similar. And perhaps they are paid for their lobbying activities. But that is just because the political landscape in the US has b
Re: (Score:2)
"Lobbying includes all attempts to influence legislators and officials, whether by other legislators, constituents or organized groups.".
Actually that is bretty tensile explanation, because if I am good democratic citizen, I would call to my representantive or meet him and disguss about things. It does not make me as lobby-citizen if I like to inform them what is my opinion about the case.
Other way, everyone would be lobbying everyone and everything when they talk here. Like you are lobbying be because you want to influence my opinion what "lobbying" means.
That's true that someone can bribe other person with material or power and not just m
Bad examples :-) (Score:2)
if I am good democratic citizen, I would call to my representantive or meet him and disguss about things. It does not make me as lobby-citizen if I like to inform them what is my opinion about the case.
True, but that example does not apply here. I this case a group of people are joining forces in an attempt to influence multiple politicians.
Like you are lobbying be because you want to influence my opinion what "lobbying" means.
Your example is flawed. I am not a group of people nor are you a politician. And discussing the meaning of the word "lobbying" is not a political issue.
So I dont take normal discussion, information sharing, or conversation as lobbying.
Good, because it is not. So far so good.
But if I get paid from organisation or group for what I talk and I try to affect things by someone's other's benefits, that is lobbyism.
As I have stated earlier, lobby activities does not require payment to be involved. The action/concept of lobbying is a part of the political system and it can be conduct
s/Denmark/Venezuela/ (Score:5, Informative)
Denmark are just part of the general howl of protest from people who've looked at the heap of excrement that is DIS 29500 and found it wanting, and/or were in one of the many countries where the behaviour of their National Bodies has made it clear that their local Microsoft lackeys have been interfering with what should be a process focussed on technical merit, not on whether personal gain can be maximised.
Re: (Score:1)
Miss Vote (Score:1)
Venezuela != Denmark (Score:3, Funny)
kdawson... (Score:1)
Denmark?!
South Arica?!
Note:grousing about rejected submissions is Offtop (Score:3, Insightful)
Note: grousing about rejected submissions is Offtopic and usually gets moderated that way. It happens, don't take it personally.
2008-06-02 19:06:05 Venezuela, Not Denmark, Is Fourth To Appeal OOXML (Index,Microsoft) (rejected)
The recent report Denmark Becomes Fourth Nation To Protest OOXML [slashdot.org] is a bit of confusion. There have been many many protests, however the IEC acknowledges four appeals- Brazil, India, South Africa and Venezuela [zdnet.co.uk]. It appears the letters from Denmark [groklaw.net] and Norway [slashdot.org] are being disregarded, as they come from the Chairmen of their respective Technical Committees rather than the administrative heads of the national organisations.
Ok, I won't grouse about rejected submissions. However I damn well will grouse about Slashdot editors re-posting wrong information after getting a submission informing them IT WAS WRONG THE FIRST TIME THEY RAN IT.
-
Re: (Score:2)
Could be a lot more. Works like this: NB calls on the committee to convene, Microsoft does not sent their guys as they already got their standard, a committee majority decides to file an appeal on procedural matter x. submitted. done.
Yes guys, these are just the appeals on the BRM. There is much much more to complain about. Happy hacking and let them embrace, extend and extinguish the domino...
Two "Standards" for the same thing??? (Score:1)
Isn't OOXML a standard for the same thing?
Having more than one international standard doesn't make much sense.
Re: (Score:2)
It is also against ISO policy. But, when msft is involved, who cares about policy, or making sense? It's all about $$.
Re:Well done, ISO! (Score:5, Informative)
Heh, good one! The fast track process was completely inappropriate for OOXML. With 9 months to review 6000 pages the technical community had only scratched the surface of what's broken in OOXML [robweir.com].
No one in the technical community is happy with the quality of OOXML -- even Microsoft can't implement this thing.
ISO wrote:
This statement has no bearing on the similar statements issued by South Africa and Brazil in their formal appeals that they should have received a final text by now. National Bodies should have received a final text but this is quite different to publishing (which is all the ISO are talking about in that final paragraph).
Section 13.12 of the directives reads,
The BRM was in February and the final text was due in late March. It still has not arrived. You might call this evidence of the OOXML text being in an unreleasable state (read: a mess) and South Africa would agree...
Re: (Score:2)
That was me. Sorry. Pepsi syndrome. What were we discussing? OOXML?
"ISO diverts OOXML spec to standard track for further improvement before adoption" is not an available future headline. "ISO rejects DIS 29500" and "New standards body gaining acceptance" are still available at this time.
Re: (Score:1)
That's right, government cheese. In a van. Down by the river.