[odf-discuss] OOXML critics: ISO approval demonstrates the need
marbux at gmail.com
Thu Apr 3 10:32:21 EDT 2008
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 7:16 AM, Russell Ossendryver <worldlabel at gmail.com>
> A similar response came from Patrick Durusau, an ODF coeditor who has vocally
> supported<http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080224-odf-backer-urges-cooperation-to-fix-ooxmls-deficiencies.html>ISO standardization for OOXML. Although Durusau believes that OOXML is a
> "poster child for the open standards development process," he says<http://www.durusau.net/publications/adhocrules.pdf>that ad hoc rules and "process failures" had a detrimental impact on the
> OOXML revision and approval effort. Durusau calls<http://www.durusau.net/publications/placeatthetable.pdf>for standards process reforms and argues that ISO needs to be more
Patrick has been making some highly indefensible statements of late. The
wookie in his latest post is the claim that OOXML approval gets both OASIS
and Ecma a seat at the same table at JTC 1 because JTC 1 has kept
responsibility for maintaining OOXML rather than handing it back to Ecma.
"Maintenance" is a term of art at JTC 1. It involves little more than
publishing the occasional errata.
What would have forced a conversation at one table would have been for JTC 1
to remove OOXML from the fast track and to harmonize or converge OOXML and
ODF, basically the French NB proposal. JTC 1 Directives provide ample
authority at pg. 145.
Unless ISO/IEC have dreamed up some new procedure not published in the JTC 1
Directives, there won't be substantive changes to OOXML before its next
periodic review, which is normally scheduled to take place every 5 years.
Some table to sit at: "The waiter will be here to take your order in 5
years. May I get you something to drink while you are waiting?"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the odf-discuss