[WSIS CS-Plenary] Microsoft fast track rejected by the US

Mon Aug 13 00:47:41 BST 2007

Hello

Goods news for interoperability and truly open standards.

There is already one open standard  ODF
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument,
but Microsoft wants to propose its own :
OOXML
with an hidden agenda.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ooxml

The "fast track" procedure  for Microsoft proposed standard
has been rejected by the US delegation at ISO.,
even if it was by a slim margin,

Canada, UK and Germany are against the fast track.

China has already no to
http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-15827/china-says-ciao-ciao-to-ooxml-one-more-no
and now it is the turn of  the US

It is very likely that many countries that ware still wavering are going
to reject the "fast track" procedure.

There were tremendous efforts by many activists, and
by Free Software organizations,  against OOXML
that must be acknowledged :
http://www.noooxml.org
http://www.france.fsfeurope.org/documents/msooxml-questions
http://www.april.org
and many others

-------------------------

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070811-microsoft-one-vote-short-of-fast-track-ooxml-iso-standardization.html

  Microsoft one vote short of fast-track OOXML ISO standardization
  <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070811-microsoft-one-vote-short-of-fast-track-ooxml-iso-standardization.html>

By Ryan Paul <http://arstechnica.com/authors.ars/segphault> | Published: 
August 11, 2007 - 02:19PM CT

Executive board members of the International Committee for Information 
Technology Standards (INCITS), the organization that represents the 
United States in ISO standardization deliberations, recently held an 
internal poll 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=vote&committee=INCITS&ballot_id=2212> 
to determine the position that the United States should take on 
Microsoft's request for Office Open XML (OOXML) approval. With eight 
votes in favor, seven against, and one abstention, the group was one 
vote short of the nine votes required for approving OOXML ISO 
standardization. This does not mean that OOXML is dead in the water, 
however. 

      Related Stories

    * Open Document Format published as ISO standard
      <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061204-8349.html>

As we have previously reported 
<http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070726-office-open-xml-iso-certification-process-grows-even-murkier-for-microsoft.html>, 
many ISO member nations are similarly rejecting the OOXML fast-track 
proposal. Although this is a considerable setback for Microsoft, it 
merely slows down the ISO standardization process for OOXML; it does not 
halt it completely. Now we are in for a protracted debate as standards 
organizations around the world engage in broad discussion and conduct 
analysis of the controversial document format.

Of the organizations that participated in the poll, Apple, the 
Department of Homeland Security, EIA, EMC, HP, Intel, Microsoft, and 
Sony all voted in favor of OOXML fast-track approval. Votes opposing 
approval came from Farance, GS1 US, IBM, Lexmark, NIST, Oracle, and the 
US Department of Defense. IEEE---which is comprised of numerous 
organizations including the companies that are on the INCITS executive 
board---abstained, citing internal disagreement.

NIST's vote opposing OOXML fast-track approval may seem peculiar in 
light of a statement issued by the organization affirming "conditional" 
support for the OOXML format. We contacted NIST for clarification on the 
organization's position. NIST representative Ben Stein responded by 
drawing our attention to section 9.8 of the ISO/IEC JTC 1 procedural 
documentation 
<http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink/fetch/2000/2122/327993/327973/JTC_1_Directives_Ed_3__2007.pdf?nodeid=6182390&vernum=0>, 
which notes that "conditional approval should be submitted as a 
disapproval vote."

Standards expert Andy Updegrove provides more insight into NIST's 
position in a blog entry 
<http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=20070810112044631>. 
As Updegrove explains, a vote of approval with comments is procedurally 
equivalent to unconditional approval, because it doesn't necessitate 
evaluation of comments and criticisms. Organizations that wish to make 
approval contingent on fulfillment of specific criteria necessarily have 
to vote against fast-track approval.

Looking at the comments issued with the votes, it appears as though 
several other organizations that voted against fast-track approval share 
NIST's position. Oracle's official comment, for instance, states that 
INCITS should "make approval of the [OOXML] specification conditional 
upon the satisfactory resolution of the large number of issues 
identified during the public review period." Likewise, the US Department 
of Defense---which also voted against fast-track approval---states that 
its position "is based on the requirement to first resolve existing 
comments and further develop/mature the present state of the standard." 
The Department of Defense cites several potential problems with the 
OOXML standard, including the use of binary information that "would lead 
to security concerns," references to undocumented backward compatibility 
formatting features that some have argued could potentially impede 
third-party implementation of the standard, and "the use of proprietary 
file formats within the open standard [that] appear to cause potential 
intellectual property ownership concerns."

Given the controversial nature, relative complexity, and significant 
importance of the standard, the results of INCIT's vote is unsurprising. 
An INCITS technical committee also voted against 
<http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070717-office-xml-hits-a-snag-on-the-way-to-iso-standardization.html> 
fast-track OOXML approval last month prior to the executive board's 
vote. Further deliberation is clearly needed as well as further 
refinement of the format. It seems as though many of the organizations 
participating in the approval process are generally supportive of the 
standard itself, but are unwilling to voice unconditional support until 
their concerns are resolved. OOXML may be down, but it's certainly not out

http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=vote&committee=INCITS&ballot_id=2212

Below is the vote tally for Letter Ballot INCITSLB2212.

To view an individual organization's response, along with any comments 
or reason for abstention, click on the organization name below.

Date 	Organization 	Yes 	No 	Abstain 	Not Yet
*TOTAL* 	8 	7 	1 	0

07/27/2007 00:00:00 	Apple Inc 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113255> 
	X 	

08/10/2007 00:00:00 	Department of Homeland Security 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113264> 
	X 	

	Comments 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113264> 

08/09/2007 00:00:00 	Electronic Industries Alliance 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113258> 
	X 	

07/20/2007 00:00:00 	EMC 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113263> 
	X 	

08/10/2007 00:00:00 	Farance, Incorporated 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113256> 

	X 	

	Comments 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113256> 

08/10/2007 00:00:00 	GS1 US 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113261> 

	X 	

	Comments 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113261> 

08/08/2007 00:00:00 	Hewlett Packard Co 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113253> 
	X 	

	Comments 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113253> 

08/06/2007 00:00:00 	IBM Corp 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113252> 

	X 	

	Comments 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113252> 

08/09/2007 00:00:00 	IEEE 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113251> 

	X 	
	Comments 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113251> 

08/09/2007 00:00:00 	Intel 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113260> 
	X 	

08/08/2007 00:00:00 	Lexmark International 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113265> 

	X 	

	Comments 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113265> 

08/08/2007 00:00:00 	Microsoft 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113262> 
	X 	

	Comments 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113262> 

08/09/2007 00:00:00 	NIST 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113254> 

	X 	

	Comments 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113254> 

08/10/2007 00:00:00 	Oracle 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113257> 

	X 	

	Comments 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113257> 

07/24/2007 00:00:00 	Sony Electronics 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113259> 
	X 	

08/09/2007 00:00:00 	US Department of Defense 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113266> 

	X 	

	Comments 
<http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=detail&response_id=113266> 

-- 

------------------------------------------------------ 
Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D 

MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals
Associate Publisher
http://www.mdpi.org   http://www.mdpi.net
muguet at mdpi.org       muguet at mdpi.net

ENSTA   Paris, France
KNIS lab.  Director 
"Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS)
muguet at ensta.fr   http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet

World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS)
Civil Society Working Groups
Scientific Information :  http://www.wsis-si.org  chair
Patents & Copyrights   :  http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair
Financing Mechanismns  :  http://www.wsis-finance.org web

UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org
WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org
------------------------------------------------------ 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20070813/80fab1cb/attachment.html