Psalehesost
The Living Force
For many months, there's been various news of irregularities in the ISO voting process for Microsoft's Office Open XML standard, their competitor to (promoted as an alternative for governments and businesses to invest at least equally in) the OpenDocument format standard. First regarding the October 2007 vote, and then regarding the second vote and subsequent approval not too long ago.
2007 vote:
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9033701&source=rss_news6 ("Microsoft admits Swedish employee promised incentives for Open XML support". And here is Microsoft's response: http://blogs.msdn.com/dmahugh/archive/2007/08/30/oh-the-drama-of-it-all.aspx And a response to that: http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-18198/doug-wants-drama )
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070902123701843 ("What happened in Hungary")
2008 vote and approval:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080324121844682 ("Cuba Votes No to OOXML - Says It Did So in September, Too" - but it was then counted as a Yes)
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080326104649643 ("Microsoft Files Complaint About India's No Vote on OOXML")
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2008032913190768 (German voters not allowed to vote "disapprove")
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080331144223128 ("Formal Protest Filed Asking that Norway's Vote Be Annulled & KEI Statement")
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2008/03/31/iso_ooxml_votes_approve/ ("OOXML approved as international standard?")
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080402003610230 (Philippines: "... when no consensus was reached, the chairman decided to make it Yes.")
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080403204025120 ("Canada Tells Why It Voted No on OOXML & How ISO Must Improve - Updated: Others See Need to Fix ISO")
http://polishlinux.org/poland/poland-confirms-its-approval-for-ooxml-in-iso/ (where representatives didn't vote, it was counted as "yes" in Poland; down at the time of writing, so alternatively: http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-50291/poland:you-don-t-vote-so-you-vote-in-favour-of-the-standard )
Much more news stories varying in substance and objectivity but much of it being informative found here: http://www.noooxml.org/index
And as for general information on the technicalities and legalities of the standard: http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=20051216153153504
There's tons and tons of stuff to dig through regarding the history of the standards process. The standard was fast-tracked against common ISO procedures, the suggested changes in response to the hundreds of comments regarding technical issues not all possible to review (standard is over 6000 pages, proposed changes near 2000) in the time available and so all accepted. The standard has now been accepted and entered the maintenance phase at ISO.
2007 vote:
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9033701&source=rss_news6 ("Microsoft admits Swedish employee promised incentives for Open XML support". And here is Microsoft's response: http://blogs.msdn.com/dmahugh/archive/2007/08/30/oh-the-drama-of-it-all.aspx And a response to that: http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-18198/doug-wants-drama )
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070902123701843 ("What happened in Hungary")
2008 vote and approval:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080324121844682 ("Cuba Votes No to OOXML - Says It Did So in September, Too" - but it was then counted as a Yes)
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080326104649643 ("Microsoft Files Complaint About India's No Vote on OOXML")
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2008032913190768 (German voters not allowed to vote "disapprove")
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080331144223128 ("Formal Protest Filed Asking that Norway's Vote Be Annulled & KEI Statement")
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2008/03/31/iso_ooxml_votes_approve/ ("OOXML approved as international standard?")
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080402003610230 (Philippines: "... when no consensus was reached, the chairman decided to make it Yes.")
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080403204025120 ("Canada Tells Why It Voted No on OOXML & How ISO Must Improve - Updated: Others See Need to Fix ISO")
http://polishlinux.org/poland/poland-confirms-its-approval-for-ooxml-in-iso/ (where representatives didn't vote, it was counted as "yes" in Poland; down at the time of writing, so alternatively: http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-50291/poland:you-don-t-vote-so-you-vote-in-favour-of-the-standard )
Much more news stories varying in substance and objectivity but much of it being informative found here: http://www.noooxml.org/index
And as for general information on the technicalities and legalities of the standard: http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=20051216153153504
There's tons and tons of stuff to dig through regarding the history of the standards process. The standard was fast-tracked against common ISO procedures, the suggested changes in response to the hundreds of comments regarding technical issues not all possible to review (standard is over 6000 pages, proposed changes near 2000) in the time available and so all accepted. The standard has now been accepted and entered the maintenance phase at ISO.
