Slashdot Mirror


Promise of OOXML Oversight By ISO Falls Through

640 Comments Are Enough for Anyone writes "Microsoft is going back on one of their promises concerning OOXML. While they originally made assurances that the ISO would take control of the standard if it were approved, Microsoft is now reversing that position and keeping near-full control over OOXML with the ECMA. This is significant because the ECMA is the group that originally rubber-stamped OOXML. It seems unlikely that they will force changes to correct problems with the standard. In Microsoft's new plan, the ISO would only be allowed to publish lists of errata and would be unable to make OOXML compatible with existing ISO standards, while the ECMA would be the one to control any new versions of the standard."

5 of 216 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Lemme get this straight... by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Office XML specification (note the absence of "Open,"

    I think the proper name that every knowledgeable should use for it is "Microsoft Office XML (MSOXML)", because this is exactly what it is.

    As for Microsoft shooting itself in the foot, I don't think it matters. I predict that MSOXML will be approved at the next ISO meeting because ISO is a fundamentally corrupt organization. It is fundamentally corrupt because it allows every country in the world to have the same voting weight, and the majority of countries in the world are fundamentally corrupt (and easily bribed by Microsoft). Voting must be weighted in some counter-bullshit-country way to avoid this problem. I think a good way to accomplish this is to weigh the votes by country GDP.

  2. Re:ugh I say, as an Ecma member by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There is a good deal of excellent work done there but this will be a blight that will be a long time in removing.

    What is this excellent work? ECMA's Wikipedia page is just a laundry list of rubber-stamped Microsoft products.

  3. Re:FFS by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why the hell doesn't anyone stop this crap from happening.

          They do, but Microsoft either a) ignores the ruling and throws money and lawyers at the courts to get an appeal and/or b) doesn't pay the fines/make the required changes. So until someone gets the balls to arrest the board of directors and throw them in jail for contempt, it's business as usual.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  4. Re:Everyone surprised by this by man_of_mr_e · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Nobody should be surprised by this, much less Rob Weir. He feigns surprise and acts like this is a shocking development.

    Here's news for you, and Rob, and everyone else. *NO FAST TRACK ISO STANDARD IS OWNED BY ISO*. Fast tracking, by it's very design, puts the onus on standards maintenance and evolution on the standards body that submits it.

    Rob knows this, but he's being deliberately disingenuous.

    By the way, the same is true for ODF. OASIS is the steward for current ODF maintenance and improvement.

  5. Re:Lemme get this straight... by jkrise · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Ask anyone who is NOT knowledgeable and what do they call it? "Microsoft Office 2007 format". And what does it work with? "Microsoft Office 2007". THAT is what it is. Even the Blow Joe's of with world know it's Microsoft propitiatory Office 2007 format and nothing more.

    You are so correct. Which is why, Alan Bell's suggested name change in one of the 600-odd resolutions becomes very meaningful. He suggests renaming the standard as "Legacy Data Formats Represented in XML". I would add a 'partially' or 'confusingly' before Represented to make things even more clear to the Average Joe.

    ****
    "US - 270

    Naming DIS 29500: The current name of DIS 29500, Office Open XML is seriously misleading in several respects. First, it is not a document format based on XML but rather an XML representation of a legacy document format with particular processing semantics. Second, reference should not be made to commercial products and clearly "Office" in the title of this proposal is meant as a reference to Microsoft Office. Lastly, the proposal is no more or less open than any other ISO proposal and so "Open" is meaningless in this context.

    It is suggested that a new name be chosen for the proposal that reflects its goal of representing and continuing a legacy document format as represented in XML. Such a name should not carry an implied reference to a Microsoft product nor should it use the term "open." One possible name would be: Legacy Document Formats Represented in XML. The principles developed from this effort might well prove effective for other legacy document formats that should be represented in XML.

    DIS 29500"
    ****

    --
    If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....