-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Open XML, the standard that was not
,----[ Quote ]
| He may be wrong that this is the final proof of misconduct at the BRM under
| the lead of Alex Brown and its mission impossible to fix the standard.
| Following the shocking uncoverings Jesper Lund Stocholm, Alex Brown and Doug
| Mahugh are acting like little school girls with their gossip and giggles on
| Twitter. But there may be method to the madness. OOXML is already approved by
| ISO JTC1. Microsoft no longer needs to persuade the national bodies or
| influence the press or call out their business partners. It is enough for
| them to rely on social engineering in SC34, shmoozing, sponsorships, free
| dinners, free beer, etc.
|
| The reporting of Groklaw about the Microsoft outbursts of unfiltered truth
| and sillyness made Alex Brown hit back to BRM allegations and he claims the
| British BSI did not do its job, didn't review ODF properly:
|
| Fact is though, we (the team) did NOT read ODF - we merely made a rapid
| pass through parts of the text over half a day, looking for obvious
| problems. Even so, the UK generated by far the greatest number of NB
| comments. This fact tells you all you need to know about the degree of
| scrutiny ODF got in its JTC 1 ballot. If you believe it was studied in
| detail in the UK, you are very wrong. … We learned from our ODF mistake,
| and rectified our errors [with open xml].
|
| Pamela Jones of Groklaw answers to his flamebait:
|
| Now, as it happens, I have formed the impression that you and the the MS
| elves want to "interoperate" with ODF so Microsoft forces can take it
| over, since even you must now realize that OOXML will never work and will
| never be adopted.
`----
http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-148110/open-xml-the-standard-that-was-not
Related:
The OOXML fight continues: here's one way you can help
,----[ Quote ]
| The UKUUG officially voiced many of the objections that were flying around at
| the time (and still are):
|
| * The BSI approved fast tracking OOXML in the absence of a revised draft
| despite over 1000 comments to the original draft.
| * Doing so undermines wider faith in the standards bodies themselves.
| * Fast tracking approval in the absence of a single implementation of the
| format—even from Microsoft—is hard to justify.
| * Rejection of the fast track is not rejection of the standard which
| should be given greater consideration before approval.
| * Fast tracking a proposed standard requires a high level of consensus.
| Something distinctly lacking with regards OOXML.
`----
http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/columns/ooxml_fight_continues_heres_one_way_you_can_help
Israel rebukes US: Our copyright laws are fine, thanks
,----[ Quote ]
| Israel wants the US government to know that it won't implement laws banning
| the circumvention of DRM and it won't rewrite its ISP safe harbor rules;
| furthermore, neither of these issues should have any effect on trade
| relations between the two countries.
|
| [...]
|
| Canadian law professor Michael Geist wishes that his own government would
| respond this forcefully to the Special 301 process.
`----
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080318-israel-rebukes-us-our-copyright-laws-are-fine-thanks.html
Has OOXML Broken the British Standards Institution?
,----[ Quote ]
| That the BSI, long the quintessence of standards in this country, should see
| itself dragged through the courts over something as apparently minor as a
| document standard, is truly an extraordinary development. But of course it is
| not a minor issue: at stake is the question of how something as central to
| technology and business as standards should be decided. Unless people have
| complete confidence in the process, the end-result will be deemed worthless –
| truly, little more than a “rubber-stamping”.
|
| A good start along the road of bolstering confidence would be making the
| standards-setting process completely open, which currently it is not. The
| practice of voting on an open standard behind closed doors borders is simply
| not justifiable in the age of the Internet and of increasing openness in
| general. And as the UK government loves to remind us: if you have nothing to
| hide, you have nothing to fear....
`----
http://www.computerworlduk.com/community/blogs/index.cfm?entryid=753&blogid=14
UK standards body taken to court over OOXML
,----[ Quote ]
| The British Standards Institution has been taken to court by a group of Unix
| users in an attempt to get the standards body to recant its approval of
| Microsoft's Office Open XML document format.
|
| The UK Unix & Open Systems User Group (UKUUG) said on Thursday that the
| British Standards Institution's (BSI's) controversial decision to vote for
| approval of OOXML in a recent International Organization for Standardization
| (ISO) ballot followed a flawed decision-making process.
`----
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39408917,00.htm
BSI faces High Court challenge over OOXML U-turn
,----[ Quote ]
| OSC director Mark Taylor told The Register that the UKUUG and chums
| were "very confident that the BSI has a case to answer". He claimed
| that "they haven’t followed procedures and we want them to explain their
| controversial actions".
|
| However, even if legal action against the BSI leads to the UK standards body
| being forced, in the form of mandatory orders, to withdraw its vote to the
| ISO, its impact could be muted.
|
| Taylor agreed: "Should the BSI be asked to remove its vote, that in itself
| probably won’t change the outcome."
|
| He added that the group hopes to see individuals in other countries mount
| similar challenges against national standards bodies in order to force the
| ISO to "sit up and take notice".
`----
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/01/bsi_ooxml_vote_high_court/
MEPs Question Microsoft's Eligibility for Gov't Projects
,----[ Quote ]
| The Commission, which has not responded yet, is allowed a few weeks to reply.
`----
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/144591/meps_question_microsofts_eligibility_for_govt_projects.html
Is Microsoft Now Banned from EU Contracts?
http://www.computerworlduk.com/toolbox/open-source/blogs/index.cfm?entryid=697&blogid=14
Euro MP thinks Microsoft should be banned from government contracts
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/04/10/member-eu-parliament-asks
Green MEP says Microsoft should be excluded from EU contract awarding procedure
http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/106338/from/rss09
EC probes OOXML standards-setting process
,----[ Quote ]
| A spokesman for the European Commissioner for Competition, Neelie Kroes, told
| The Register that regulators were continuing to scrutinise interoperability
| issues related to Microsoft’s products following complaints from the
| Committee for Interoperable Systems (ECIS) group.
|
| As part of that process, the EC formally contacted a number of national
| standards bodies, including the Norwegian Standards Institute (NSI),
| requesting more details about possible irregularities in the OOXML
| standardisation process.
|
| [...]
|
| “It must be stressed that it is not the Commission's intention to influence
| the outcome of this process, but the Commission considers it essential to
| ensure that European competition law is not violated in the course of the
| standard setting process,” he said in an email to El Reg.
|
| In January the EC began formal anti-trust probes against Microsoft in two
| cases where it was alleged that the multinational firm had abused its strong
| market position. As part of the investigation into the first case, the
| Commission said that it would scrutinise OOXML on the grounds that the
| specification doesn't work with those of competitors.
`----
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/04/ooxml_ec_investigation_iso/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAknq3mIACgkQU4xAY3RXLo4F3wCfSg5iklf1pKAEjaZAQ+Xiqns1
hSkAoItH1H3FU4nvwieWkLd/rt2DsYT2
=P5iE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
