ISO Puts OOXML On Hold

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 Here is ISO's press release, which says that ISO/IEC DIS 29500 will not be published for at least "several months" while the appeals process goes forward.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.

Comments

GREAT

[anti-human 1]

"On hold" is nice, but will there be an investigation or backlash regarding how it was passed in the first place? Or has the process of buying a standard just become a cost of doing business?

Re:GREAT

[Chris Burke]

"On hold" is nice, but will there be an investigation or backlash regarding how it was passed in the first place? Or has the process of buying a standard just become a cost of doing business?

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

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you misunderstand -- It's still an international standard it's just not published and Ecma/Microsoft/ISO-secretariat have the only copy of the standard.

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.

ISO standards themselves are closed!

[compumike]

I know everyone's going to make comments about OOXML being not a truly open/free/libre format, but there's something bigger going on...

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!

hurrah!

[apodyopsis]

I have a nasty thought that "on hold" is ISO speak for "waiting for the fuss to die down".

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!

[Anonymous Coward]

The largest downside, in my opinion is the resignations from people who have become disenchanted with the ISO.

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..."

Minor correction.

[khasim]

They're just doing what they have to.

Not even that.

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 ... doesn't mean that they're still not bought and paid for.

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.

Even worse...

[msauve]

are SAE standards, many of which are incorporated into US regulatory law.

The net effect is that you can't be sure you're legally compliant unless you pay some private organization a tithe.

If only I could cry nonsense

[thermian]

Alas I fear I cannot. I find myself tending towards the belief that Microsoft will stop at nothing to get their ISO standard assigned, even if it means the destruction of the credibility of ISO itself.

Mind you, if ISO is so vulnerable this does beg the question 'is it still relevant?'

Re:If only I could cry nonsense

[TrixX]

Mind you, if ISO is so vulnerable this does beg the question 'is it still relevant?'

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:If only I could cry nonsense

[zeromorph]

Mind you, if ISO is so vulnerable this does beg the question 'is it still relevant?'

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

[wish bot]

It's more of a best practice thing, as the codes tend to be performance based. For example, if I designed a pedestrian bridge to meet the structural codes but something went wrong - it would still be my fault, not ISO's.

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:If only I could cry nonsense

[GotenXiao]

"Microsoft's decision to add support to Office 2007 for the Open Document Format instead of its own OOXML office file format is due to backwards compatibility issues with OOXML, it has emerged."

"In Microsoft's announcement, the company said it was adding native support for ODF due to increasing pressure from customers "and because we want to get involved in the maintenance of ODF". The company now says OOXML support would require substantially more work."

Read:
Embrace, extend, extinguish.

Re:If only I could cry nonsense

[Bert64]

Amusing that OOXML will require "substantially more work", it reinforces what people have been saying about it being difficult to implement... And if Microsoft have trouble implementing it, when they wrote it in the first place, just think how difficult it will be for other parties?

Re:The summary is impressive with inaccuracy

[cyber-vandal]

We can disregard Venezuela as they are Commmies and enemies of freedom.

Note:grousing about rejected submissions is Offtop

[Alsee]

Note: grousing about rejected submissions is Offtopic and usually gets moderated that way. It happens, don't take it personally.
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 is a bit of confusion. There have been many many protests, however the IEC acknowledges four appeals- Brazil, India, South Africa and Venezuela. It appears the letters from Denmark and Norway 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.

-