[odf-discuss] Gnome, Ecma, and what governments (and FOSS?) should have done

[Ian Lynch]

On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 06:49 -0700, Daniel Carrera wrote:
> From: Pamela Jones <pj at groklaw.net>
> 
> > Please do not say that the ISO process is not political.  It very much is.
> 
> Don't confuse the issue by using vaguer terms like "the ISO process".
> Some ISO processes may be political, but the ballot resolution process
> is strictly a matter of going through a list of conflicts that have
> already been submitting, and making a substantive change to the spec
> as a response.

But who then makes the judgement that the conflicts are or are not
sufficiently resolved? I might be wrong but I doubt that making such
judgements is going to be as cut and dried as 1+1 = 2. We have already
seen the lengths that those with an interest in forcing things through
will go to. One would hope that the ballot resolution would be objective
and rational but a degree of scepticism and caution seems to me a safer
approach. 

Regards,

Ian
-- 
New QCA Accredited IT Qualifications
www.theINGOTs.org

You have received this email from the following company: The Learning
Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79
8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.