[odf-discuss] [Fwd: OOXML]

[marbux]

There are two schools of thought here. I.e., we *want* them to know
they're in the spotlight. That doesn't mean that offensive
communications should be encouraged. From our previous discussions, I
infer that the most effective communications other than the needed
contradictions will be contacts by the media. To the extent that these
folks are aware that the media is on this issue, they have a reason to
be concerned about their image were they to support keeping Ecma 376
on the fast track.

People should not hesitate to raise the potential impact of the
decision on the reputation of  JTC-1 and ISO. It is in fact a key
concern identified in the JTC-1 Directives.
<http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink.exe/fetch/2000/2489/186491/186605/Jtc1_Directives.pdf?nodeid=3959538&vernum=0>
(PDF), pg. 50. See section 11.1.3, second bullet item:

>>>
11.1.2 A P-member of JTC 1 or an SC may appeal against any action, or
inaction, on the part of JTC 1 or an SC when the P-member considers
that such action or inaction is:

• Not in accordance with these directives; or
• Not in the best interests of international trade and commerce, or
such public factors as safety, health or environment.

11.1.3 Matters under appeal may be either technical or administrative
in nature. Appeals on decisions concerning NPs, CDs and DISs are only
eligible for consideration if:

• Questions of principle are involved;
• The contents of a draft may be detrimental to the reputation of IEC or ISO; or
• The point giving rise to objection was not known to JTC 1 or SC
during earlier discussions.
<<<

These people are not indifferent to ISO's reputation. They are
protective of it. They *want* to be warned if their reputational
interests may be affected. And of course, those interests are not at
risk if no one is watching. So the knowledge that the world is
watching is valuable input for them.

Spamming them with form letters is not something I recommend. Form
letters tend to be widely regarded by decisionmakers as
flash-in-the-pan stuff rather than something indicative of a more
abiding public interest in an issue. But there is no reason to shrink
from instigating thoughtful and informed emails to them. For example,
a fairly simple email saying that folks want to make sure they are
aware of the EOOXML Objections document,
<http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections>, conveys the
message that people care while emphasizing the importance of the
contradictions. And if lots of people are sending such messages, it
can only help.

The trick is to empower those who object to EOOXML's fast-track
processing while disarming those who support it. Stacks of emails
saying the public is watching and cares do just that. The reputations
of JTC-1 and ISO/IEC are in reality at risk. Warnings of that danger
are highly relevant, can be made sincerely, and will only be unwelcome
to those that support fast-tracking. If they have their own stacks of
messages warning of the reputational danger, they're not in a position
to argue that the reputation issue is unimportant.

So I say, let 'er rip. We want publicity, we want pressure, we want to
empower those who are leaning our way, and we want to disarm those who
are leaning the other way. In my opinion, there is no compelling
reason to hold back.

Best regards,

Marbux

On 1/25/07, Daniel Carrera <daniel.carrera at zmsl.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 20:59 +0100, Peter Vandenabeele wrote:
> > "Spamming" them if you don't have a prior
> > relationship could be counterproductive.
>
> To what Peter said, I'd like to add that if you _do_ choose to contact
> them (please don't spam them) keep in mind who you are talking to. You
> are not talking to politicians or PR people. You are talking to techies
> who are used to making decisions on technical grounds and are _not_ used
> to public pressure, and may not take it well. You don't talk to an ISO
> member the way you talk to your MP or congressman.
>
> * Your MP is a politician. He is allowed, and _expected_ to be
> political. His _job_ is to respond to public pressure.
> * An ISO member's _job_ is to _not_ respond to public pressure.
>
> I did choose to contact the Canadian reps, and I hope I did the right
> thing. When I wrote, I tried to be purely factual and not look like I
> was trying to create political pressure.
>
> Best,
> Daniel.
> --
> May you live in interesting times.
> May people in high places take notice of you.
> May all your wishes come true.
>   -- Chinese curse.
>
> _______________________________________________
> odf-discuss mailing list
> odf-discuss at opendocumentfellowship.org
> http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.org/mailman/listinfo/odf-discuss
>