[odf-discuss] ISO issues: Maddog, Holland, Belgium and France about MS-OOXML fast-track

[Alberto Barrionuevo]

Hi all,

FYI from our collaborators of SoftwareLivre in Brazil here comes a
letter from Maddog to ISO representative:

http://www.softwarelivre.org/news/8389

Additionally good news: Holland asks to reject fast-track:
http://automatiseringgids.sdu.nl/ag/nieuws/nieuws/toon_nieuwsbericht.jsp?di=304881 [in NL]

And things are hot in Belgium also:
http://www.zdnet.be/news.cfm?id=65093 [in Flemish]

And getting so warm in France (text from FFII France President):
        
        ---
        - APRIL (French Free Software Association) has sent a letter to
        AFNO (fr
        representant at ISO) :
        http://www.april.org/groupes/institutions/20070202-AFNOR.pdf [in
        FR]
        
        - Bernard Carayon (MP of government party->PPE) has asked a
        written
        question to the Minister of Industry, pointing at the conflict
        of this
        fasttrack adoption of OOXML with the recommandation of Open
        Document
        Format in the General Referential on Interoperability (a
        government
        initiative to "impose" open standard for public documents, it
        was backed
        by CCIA in an open letter
        http://www.ffii.fr/IMG/pdf/RGI-06-2006.pdf) :
        http://www.bcarayon-ie.com/blog/index.php?2007/02/02/48-question-ecrite-a-lattention-de-monsieur-le-ministre-delegue-a-l-industrie-sur-la-coherence-de-la-position-francaise-en-matiere-de-formats-logiciels-ouverts [in FR both]
        ---

---Maddog letter to ISO---
Dear Mr. Bryden,

It has come to my attention that ECMA 376 is under Fast-Track processing
as an ISO specification. This is in regards to the OpenXML
specification, which is over 6000 pages long. Microsoft has submitted
this as a Fast-Track submission to ISO and is ramming it through.

The review period was only a month, and given the fact that people in
that short time have found several objections:

(http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections)

to a specification that will have such world-wide impact, I think that
some more time and effort should be put into the review process and that
ECMA should come to resolution of these issues and consensus in the
world-wide community before re-submitting this proposal.

In addition, as an elder 38-year member of the commercial computer
industry, historian and computer scientist, I really have to say that I
am *shocked* at the concept of invalidating existing standards of
calendar creation (ISO 8601) and the *definition* of the Georgian
calendar just because of a bug in one commercial vendor's particular
product. If you do not know what I am talking about, and especially if
you *do* know what I am talking about, then you *have* to send the
Fast-Track proposal back to ECMA.

Warmest regards,

Jon "maddog" Hall 
--

Saludos,
//Alberto.
-- 
Alberto Barrionuevo   Vice-President F.F.I.I.   +34 639708494   abarrio(@)ffii·org
                           ~~ LEX INIUSTA NON EST LEX ~~
   Open Standards coordination at FFII      http://action.ffii.org/openstandards
   Coordinación de EstándaresAbiertos.org   http://www.estandaresabiertos.org