Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

[News] [Rival] New Fiasco Involving Microsoft-corrupted OOXML BRM Convenor

  • Subject: [News] [Rival] New Fiasco Involving Microsoft-corrupted OOXML BRM Convenor
  • From: Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 19:23:04 +0000
  • Followup-to: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • User-agent: KNode/4.3.1
Hash: SHA1

Alex Brown wants Brazil out of the ISO !

,----[ Quote ]
| As if the dirty things he did with Brazil 
| during the OpenXML BRM in ISO wasnât 
| sufficient, now Alex Brown suggests in his blog 
| that Brazil shouldnât be a SC34 member at JTC1. 
| Reason: Brazil did not send delegates to the 
| SC34 WGâs meeting in Paris last week!
| Seeing that I was nominated as one of the 
| Brazilian delegates, I want to make clear the 
| explanation about my absence: I had no money to 
| pay for my trip! (btw, since the middle of this 
| year I donât know what is âhave moneyâ for 
| anything â).


Microsoft = white-collar crime.


OOXMLâs BRM: A flow of dirt

,----[ Quote ]
| Finally Jomar, one of the brazilian delegate that went to OOXMLâs BRM in 
| Geneva has started to tell all the dirty little details of what really 
| happened in that meeting and the surreal modus operandi of how 120 people can 
| discuss 1027 issues in 5 days. Have fun in english and portuguese.   
| Oh, and talking about dirty playing, check the domain 
| www.DocumentFreedomDay.com but remember that the original one is 
| www.DocumentFreedom.org. The first one really deserves a DDoS attack.  


Finally: the details about the final results of the BRM

,----[ Quote ]
| During the debates, some discussions had expanded and covered more than one 
| ECMAâs responses (or sometimes different responses dealt with related 
| themes), and this explains the high degree of items discussed (or as I prefer 
| to call âtouchedâ) during the BRM (withdrawn from this document, the final 
| document of BRM): 189 responses or 18.4% of the total (is that the amount of 
| discussed items expected on an International Evaluation of a so important 
| theme specification? Imagine if your countryâs constitution was write using 
| that method, with only 18% of itâs laws discussed).       


Porn Site technique used to promote OOXML

,----[ Quote ]
| In March 26, 2008, was celebrated around the world the first Document Freedom 
| Day (documentfreedom.org/). Notice the site's name: Document 
| Freedom dot org.  
| While refusing all around the world to participate in a celebration towards 
| the promotion and usage of open standards, Microsoft even goes to the point 
| of issuing a press release in Portugal against ANSOL's Document Freedom Day 
| announcement.   
| Meanwhile, anonymous supporters of OOXML use Domains by Proxy registar in 
| order to register a site with a very similar address of Document Freedom 
| Day's. The OOXML support site is Document Freedom Day **dot com** and 
| redirects to a well known astroturf site which pretends to be a community of 
| OOXML supporters.    



At the end: What we did in Geneva ?

,----[ Quote ]
| This person tried in saying that believes that we should not submit our 
| proposal that asked the mapping, since there was no time at the meeting (just 
| over three hours) to write the mapping document. Weâve said that our proposal 
| stemmed from the premise that the ECMA had this document because they 
| justifies âthe needâ of OOXML because it supports the binary documents legacy 
| and it is also stated that there are still things that can not be translated 
| (deprecated), they should have thoroughly studied this and at least have made 
| the mapping.       
| I have never seen a person so nervous and ashamed in my lifeâ He said that 
| Microsoft should have this mapping and if we want, we can ask it to Microsoft 
| but not ask it to ECMA. He said that ECMA was only responsible for creating 
| the new XML schema and who do not have this mapping documentation.   


ISO Statement on the BRM: Public Stay Out

,----[ Quote ]
| So much for an open standard. I have a question for the ISO. Have all prior 
| meetings been run like this? In the deepest shade you can find? You know they 
| have not, and I know they have not.  
| So, how about letting us listen to audio of the meeting, so we can compare 
| claims now coming from all sides? There are so many different accounts, and 
| they don't all sync up. Given that this format, if accepted, will impact us 
| little people, not just a bunch of vendors, how about letting us in enough to 
| make it at least possible to figure out who is telling the truth?    
| Hey, EU Commission. Did you know that there is reportedly audio made of the 
| BRM meeting?  


Probe into votes on Microsoft standard

,----[ Quote ] 
| The European Commission is investigating the process under which a key 
| Microsoft document format could be adopted as an industry standard - a move 
| that would carry significant commercial benefits for the software company.  
| Officials at the European Commission's competition directorate have written 
| to members of the International Organisation for Standardisation, asking how 
| they prepared for votes in September and later this month on acceptance of 
| Microsoft's OOXML document format as a worldwide standard. Without ISO 
| acceptance, Microsoft could stand to lose business, particularly with 
| government clients, some of which are becoming increasingly keen to use only 
| ISO-certified software.      
| The ISO process has been widely criticised, however, with some members of 
| national standards' bodies accusing Microsoft and its rivals of attempting to 
| influence the vote.  
| Tim Bray, a member of the Canadian national standards body, called the 
| procedure "complete, utter, unadulterated bullshit" in a recent blog posting. 
| [...]
| In addition, in several countries, a large number of Microsoft partners 
| joined the national standards organisations just ahead of a vote on the issue 
| in September.  
| [...]
| Microsoft said it openly encouraged its partners to participate in the ISO 
| process, but was not funding any third parties doing so. The company said it 
| would cooperate with the European Commission's inquiry.   


The Art of Being Mugged

,----[ Quote ]
| The four options presented were:
|     * Option 1: Submitter's responses (Ecma's) are all automatically 
|       approved. 
|     * Option 2: Anything not discussed is not approved.
|     * Option 3: Neutral third-party (ITTF) decides which Ecma responses are 
|        accepted 
|     * Option 4: Voting (approve + disapprove) must be at least 9 votes. 
|       Abstentions not counted. 
| We were told that these options are not in the Directives and that were are 
| given these choices because ITTF "needs to act in the best interests of the 
| IEC". I don't quite get it, but there appears to be some concern over what 
| the press would think if the BRM did not handle all of the comments. One NB 
| requested to speak and asked, "I wonder what the press would think about 
| arbitrarily changed procedures?". No response. I thought to myself, why 
| wasn't ITTF thinking about the 'best interests" of JTC1 when they allowed a 
| 6,045 page Fast Track submission, or ignored all those contradiction 
| submissions, or decided to schedule a 5-day BRM to handle 3,522 NB comments. 
| Isn't it a bit late to start worrying about what the press will think?         
| We break for lunch.
| After lunch and after more discussion, the meeting adopted a variation of 
| option 4, by removing the vote minimum. I believe in this vote the BRM and 
| ITTF exceeded its authority and violated the consensus principles described 
| in JTC1 Directives.   

Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index