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 While they originally made assurances that the ISO would take control of the standard if it were approved, Microsoft is now reversing that position and keeping near-full control over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."

Comments

Re:Isn't it 'ECMA'?

[Tetsujin]

...not EMCA? But it's fun to stae and the EMCA...

Lemme get this straight...

[Eggplant62]

Microsoft was running circles around itself in an effort to get this monstrosity known as Office XML specification (note the absence of "Open," since it is my belief there is nothing "open" about it) just 4 months ago, loading standards panel with shills for the voting process, and now they're thumbing their noses at another standards body over the same specification?

Way to go, Microsoft! Another shot to the foot. Keep shooting and maybe we can take out a knee next, eh?

Re:Lemme get this straight...

[zippthorne]

They're putting it through so they can satisfy laws in places like Massachusetts which require (or are going to require, maybe?) open standards for government documents. If they sneak in a not-really-open standard as an open one, the letter of the law in such states would be satisfied by going with Microsoft, and other bidding laws then take over. "Fair" bidding laws which Microsoft can manipulate for favorable results.

"It's not really an open standard" is going to be a pretty poor legal position if they've got the ISO stamp of approval.

This is a surprise?

[hyades1]

Anyone who expects Microsoft to keep its word on a matter like this is possessed of a level of ingenuousness approached only by two-year-olds, puppies and sociology professors.

Is any rational person surprised?

[bogaboga]

I wonder whether any informed person is surprised by Microsoft's move. On a more serious note I get really pissed of by respectable members of the Open Source community who these days, trust Microsoft.

Guys, let's wait for Microsoft's SilverLight platform. I can guarantee that there will be more controversy on that front, and again, some members of the OSS community will quickly join the band wagon.

Re:Better Idea

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

My unicorn is out back, eating glitter... Terrible. She farts rainbows for a couple days afterwards.

Re:Standard?

[Anonymous Coward]

=! != !=

Re:And why not?

[erroneus]

Are you suggesting that ISO should have granted them ISO recognition in spite of the fact that OOXML is vaguely defined at best?

Anything Microsoft puts out is a moving target when it comes to being compatible or interoperable. Samba may be an exception, but only because Samba was relentless in keeping up with the changes and Microsoft seems to have run out of wriggle room in messing around with the standard while maintaining compatibility with their own software.

OOXML is simply unworthy. Microsoft is simply untrustworthy. Microsoft's behavior is quite consistent in this respect. Story after story is available illustrating "partnerships" formed only to have Microsoft turn on these partners when it suits them. They are more than a business. They are predatory, dishonest and untrustworthy. They epitomize everything that's wrong with contemporary business.