[odf-discuss] Tim Bray on ISO debacle

[Lars Noodén]

Ian Lynch wrote:

> Maybe we need to hit a slightly different angle. Some highly public
> airing of the ISO process 

There is some notice, but not of the irregularities.  e.g. this one from 
Groklaw newspicks:
  http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/index.php/id;619140964

Anyone that has an opportunity to dig can probably find parallels with 
the attempts in various US states to produce legislation recognizing 
open standards and / or open source.  The media has quite a bit of 
amnesia in regards to these tactics.

> ... and how flaky it is in resisting vested
> interests. If ISO is broken maybe they might be embarrassed enough to
> fix it 

There is merit in that.  We can probably get results.  One of the 
clearer summaries (except for what might be slightly questionable use of 
the word 'virtual')  can be read / heard here:
	
	http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080229171250199
	http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/AndyUpdegroveGeneva.ogg

> ... and concentrating on the ISO process stops it appearing that it's
> simply an anti-MS thing.

Over the last 10 years, *any* discussion that evaluates based on 
technical merit, costs, licensing, ethics, etc. ends up putting MS at 
the bottom of the list, or off the list.

One thing I usually do before presenting technical or licensing material 
  is go over 5 minutes of basic marketing focusing on brand recognition, 
including the downside of a long run of bad service, products and behavior.

MS' marketing firms spin *anything* short of glowing hagiographies of 
his Billness as anti-MS.  So anything except the One Microsoft Way is 
likely to get dismissed as 'anti-MS'  MS works off of a variant of the 
propaganda methods the Reagan administration specialized in, the Big 
Lie: behavior or assertions so outrageous that common people choose to 
believe that they must be acceptable, because otherwise "someone would 
have stopped that"  Your average person (or even average director, dean 
or CEO) simply can't fathom that some interest external to MS hasn't 
done something about the quality, anti-competitive methods, etc. [1]

For ODF, the standard is often (usually) described as being backed by MS 
competitors.  Never is it brought up that it is backed by industry, with 
one holdout.

So I guess 3 points to bring forward are:

1) industry backing for ODF
2) brokenness of the current ISO fast tracking process, especially in 
regards to fronts like Ecma.
3) irregularities and downright corruption apparently hitting all ISO 
countries, even countries like Finland and Sweden

Regards,
-Lars

[1]	One resource, IMHO, which is worth gold here is the analysis at 
Groklaw from Comes vs MS:
	http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20071023002351958

It shows that regardless of whether MS chooses to call itself a company, 
party, movement or cult, it uses methods more associated with aggressive 
examples of the latter than of the former.