[odf-discuss] INCITS Admin Site - Vote Tally for ooxml with
peter at vandenabeele.com
Sat Aug 11 07:14:22 EDT 2007
It is really interesting to see how the NIST position on ballot 2212 is
represented differently in different media ....
The formal position is very clear from the vote on Aug 9:
It is a complicated text that states they they would like to "agree with
comments", but that the formality of the process:
[... [Note: Conditional approval should be submitted as a disapproval
requires NIST to vote "NO" in this case.
Further on NIST even mentions clearly:
[... NIST would support a US National Body conditional approval vote
(i.e., DISAPPROVE with comments). ...] (my emphasis added).
The problems with the current ballot 2212 are clearly documented in
the comment text.
Funny to see how this facts is enterpreted on Aug 10 by news.com as:
"NIST endorses Microsoft's Open XML in upcoming vote"
[... The U.S. standards body said on Friday that it has voted to
conditionally approve Office Open XML (OOXML) pending some technical
concerns in an upcoming standards approval vote. ...]
For some reason, I get the impression someone at NIST or news.com forgot to
mention that an intended "conditional approval" in the INCITS rules needs to
be formally translated into a "NO" vote for this specific 2212 ballot for
"approval with comments" and even this would even translate into a "YES" vote
to a a new "disapprove with comments" ballot.
I hope this can clarify the confusion about whether NIST now approved or not
the INCITS 2212 ballot for conditional approval.
More information about the odf-discuss