[odf-discuss] Private deal to approve OOXML? More evidence surfaces

[robert_weir at us.ibm.com]

There certainly are some weird things happening in SC34. 

First, note that this resolution does not, as Alex Brown claims, set any 
SC34 maintenance or control of OOXML or ODF.  All it does is establish two 
ad hoc committees to investigate how these tasks might be done.  The main 
one will not report back until October.   Any real action, such as an NP, 
or creating a new WG, would require a letter ballot.

Second, the resolution starts off with the assertion : "SC 34 is the JTC 1 
designated maintenance body for ISO/IEC 29500 (Office Open XML file 
formats)".   However merely stating it does not make it true.  Only JTC1 
can designate a maintenance group for a Fast Track, and I have seen no 
JTC1 discussion or vote on the matter. 

Note that moving ODF maintenance to SC34 is not possible under JTC1 rules. 
 I'd be personally opposed to it.  JTC1 is far less open, far less 
transparent and offers far fewer IPR protections than OASIS does.  We'd be 
fools to move ODF into a dark room where they can kill it without leaving 
a mark.  I'll take my chances in the open.

-Rob

odf-discuss-bounces at opendocumentfellowship.com wrote on 04/10/2008 
03:19:01 PM:

> Circumstantial evidence is mounting of one or more private deals 
> having been struck to approve DIS-29500 Office Open XML ("OOXML") as
> an international standard, a deal that may have played a role in 
> several key national standardization bodies changing their voting 
> position to approve OOXML.
> 
> [more]
> 
> <http://www.universal-interop-council.org/node/29>
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.com/pipermail/odf-discuss/attachments/20080410/e7a4f1c6/attachment.html