blog community

Welcome to blog community Sign in | Join | Help
in Search

Wouter van Vugt

This blog is no longer maintained and has moved

Working to a 'Approve with Comments'

There is great news coming from Doug today. The INCITS executive board in The States which handles the American vote on the ISO process of Open XML has decided to issue a ballot for an "Approval with Comments" for the ISO ratification of the Open XML standard. I think that some of you misunderstood the previous comments mentioned by people such as Rob Weir on the inability of Open XML to gain approval in this committee. Funny how the way in which you voice your opinion forms the opinions of those around you, especially of the parrots that I see flying around the web. It even got picked up by the press. This was to be expected as Weir states in the blog title that 'Open XML fails to gain approval'. Well, at least he has funny bed-side stories that try to show some morality or something, but in my opinion this shows the complete lack of understanding of your customer and their level of expertise, or do you think that our government officials like to be belittled and read about the Thimbleberry Inn and their kitchen?

The difficulty in this process is not the technical basis of Open XML, but the passion and politics of people surrounding this great technology. One part is formed by pro-Open Source people (perhaps I should call them anti-Microsoft, because I am pro open source as well. To me Open Source serves no purpose, applications do, so open and closed is all the same. Open standards is another thing.)  The other part is formed with people who actually care about the technology, not the politics. Both parties raise some great comments, and some not so great comments (Like, 'Even Word won't save in Open XML'). Please understand that these committee's often drive on consensus, which is why it is so difficult to achieve consensus, especially when people raise comments such as 'I object because I object', without technical basis, something I've been hearing here in the Netherlands quite often.

As some of you know I am taking part in the Dutch board that decided the Dutch vote on ISO/IEC standardization of Open XML. We are also struggling with reaching a conclusive vote. Similar to the INCITS board there are a few types of members in the Dutch committee:

  • Some members felt that "Approval with comments" was the position to take, because it sends a message that Open XML should become an ISO standard, but there are some things that need to be corrected or modified in the spec. Many of these members didn't support "Disapprove with comments" because they believed it would allow anti-Open XML lobbyists on V1 to obstruct the process in the future. (Personally, I fall into this camp.)
  • Some members felt that "Disapprove with comments" was the position to take, because it would force the resolution of certain comments. Many of these members didn't support "Approve with comments" because they believed it would allow critical corrections to slip through the process without being handled.
  • The IBM rep states that 'he will just say no', and also stated that he will not provide any technical comment because that would allow the comment to be fixed, hence opening the door to making Open XML an ISO standard. Can you believe that?

Personally I can say that I feel IBM is trying to play the decision makers to vote against Open XML, solely to benefit their own investment in ODF, with complete disregard of customer and community demand. Our committee has to fight against 'secret agenda's' being handed down from IBM headquarters to the IBM rep in the committee. You can probably imagine how technical this secret agenda will be… (I think it states 'just say no')

Interesting times, especially now that the INCITS will vote on a Yes with Comments. Something I hope to achieve here in Holland as well. And I feel that this displays the great market interest in Open XML as well as the benefit it will provide to our society. For the non-believers, go check out the Open XML Community website and read some of the praises from those around you.

In Holland we also have a parrot-site, called www.scriptumlibre.org. You can find greatly detailed technical objections to Open XML. Something like 'this threatening and dangerous situation must be stopped' I have been talking to members about this childish approach taken by Scriptumlibre, and as a whole I haven't noticed an overwhelming amount of knowledge on Open XML. So all in all, it is not the technology that is bugging, it is the politics. The great thing that IBM has been able to spin is that ODF will benefit Open Source and will hurt Microsoft, and all the Open Source developers jump on the bandwagon. One question for them, how does it feel to be working for IBM?

[Edit /] With some enthusiasm I can state that in the Netherlands we will try to work towards either a yes, or a no with comments. Great to hear that the 'just say no' antics have dropped and we can now get down to real technical issues, of which there are quite a few in the spec!

Published Friday, July 20, 2007 1:23 PM by wouterv

Comments

 

Noticias externas said:

Doug Mahugh has another update on what's going on with the US review of the Open XML standard. They've
July 20, 2007 4:29 PM
 

Wictor Wilen said:

Here are some interesting links on the (summer) hot OOXML vs ODF discussion. INCITS issues a ballot of "yes" with comments by Doug Mahugh South Africa votes No with comments on the standardisation of...

July 21, 2007 1:49 PM
 

hAl said:

I think a no with comments would not be bad as long as it actually consist of constructive comments and comments that can bye fixed in the fasttracking proces. Sending in comments that are impossible to fix in the timeframe of the fasttracking or are outside the scope of Ecma possibilities (like adding the binary MS office specs) should not be submitted. If any NO with comments is reached it should be a consise set of technical comments that the dutch committe would see important and mayby a seperate list of editorial comments that could also have been submitted in a yes vote. I have seen an example suggestion for technical comments on Rick Jeliffes blog.
July 22, 2007 1:07 PM
 

wouterv said:

Hi hAl,

I fully agree and I am happy to say this is the direction that the committee is taking as well. Leave out the FUD to work on the real issues at hand. I hope we can reach this destination in either a yes-or-no form, where I would prefer a Yes because I do not feel that the issues we have right now are big enough to motivate a no.

Wouter

July 22, 2007 2:02 PM
 

Ave Maria said:

A reply to your question from someone who does Free and OpenSource Software related to ODF: IBM, SUN, the aliens and Saddam are controlling us - right.... or do we probably just see what can be implemented and used and what can't cause we know about technology?
July 23, 2007 6:06 PM
 

Doug Mahugh said:

We're having TechReady here in Seattle this week, which is a great chance to catch up with colleagues
July 26, 2007 5:14 PM
 

Rob Weemhoff (IBM Rep) said:

Personally, but professionally, I still think there should be no two ISO standards for this type of file exchange. And a MS specification for legacy formats should not be an ISO standard either.
July 26, 2007 10:33 PM
Anonymous comments are disabled

This Blog

Syndication

News


Add to Technorati Favorites
Powered by Community Server, by Telligent Systems