OOXML Vote and the CPI Corruption Index

Tapani Tarvainen writes "It turns out there's an interesting correlation between Transparency International's 'corruption perceptions index' and voting behavior in ISO's OOXML decision. Countries with a lower score (more corruption) on the 2006 CPI were more likely to vote in favor of OOXML, and those with a higher score were less likely. According to the analysis, 'This statistics supports with a P value of 0.07328 the hypothesis that the corrupted countries were more likely to vote for approval (one-tailed Fisher's Exact test). In other words, simplified a bit: the likelihood that there was no positive correlation between the corruption level and probability of an approval vote, that is, this is just a random effect, is about 7%.' Of course, correlation doesn't prove causality."

Comments

Re:OpenISO.org

[throup]

Thanks to what Microsoft have told me, I believe there is a place in the world for both of your competing certifying bodies. One may publish potential standards that have been created from scratch with the intention of being useful to the world, whilst the other may be better suited to represent existing standards in a more open way.

So, for example, OpenISO.org may publish something along the lines of:

Standard process for brushing teeth

• Hold toothbrush in left hand;
• Hold toothpaste tube in right hand;
• Position tube above toothbrush and squeeze the tube until a pea-sized amount of paste is on the brush;
• Transfer brush to right hand and follow the process detailed in OpenISO.org OI22987 Standard process to brush something.

Whereas SoiOpen.com may publish something along the lines of:

Brush your teeth the right way

• Buy a Colgate toothbrush;
• Buy some Colgate toothpaste;
• Use them like Steve Ballmer does*.

* For personal reasons, Mr Ballmer will not discuss his dental hygiene routine with anyone.

Sorted.