[Wylug-discuss] MS Office XML and ISO Standardisation

[Dave Fisher]

Hi all,

Since it's still difficult to get news about this process, I thought
that I'd post a few URLs:

  1. Andy Updegrove's Standards Blog
     http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=20070206145620473
    
    "Well the results are in, and an unprecedented nineteen countries
     have responded during the contradictions phase - most or all lodging
     formal contradictions"

  2. 19 Nations Respond, Most File Contradictions on Microsoft's OXML
     http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070206212917261
     The Groklaw Discussion.

HOWEVER:

  This overview of the procedure, makes it clear that nothing has really
  been 'won' yet. 
  
     http://opendocument.xml.org/node/238
  
  The contradictions raised by national standards bodies have to sustain
  their 'contradictions', if they are to have any effect. 
  
  A quote:

     "If an NB submits a contradiction, then attempts are made to resolve
     differences by the ISO's ITTF and the JTC-1 Secretariat before
     ballots are distributed on the contradiction. If an NB maintains a
     contradiction, further dispute resolution processes may ensue, but
     a contradiction is in effect a veto. The default is that the draft
     standard remains on the fast track unless a contradiction is raised
     *and maintained*. If the draft standard remains on the fast track, a
     final ballot on Ecma 376 adoption as an International Standard is
     distributed to all ISO members five months after the vote on the
     contradiction.  However, I stress that it is a consensus process
     throughout.  It is not, for example, a process whose decisions are
     made by majority vote.

     During the 5-month period, the draft standard is reviewed and can
     be amended by agreement. However, if Ecma 376 is derailed from the
     fast track, then it would have to be resubmitted by Ecma
     International to JTC-1 on a more flexible track, allowing far more
     time for thorough review and evaluation of the 6,039-page draft
     standard. That assumes that Ecma would decide to do so rather than
     just abandoning the ISO standardization goal."

I'm not sure that I've fully understood the above, but my first reading
of it leads me to believe that:
    
    1. 'Open' XML is still on the fast track, until all the
       contradictions are dealt with.

    2. If the contradictions are *not* maintained, there will be a vote in
       5 months time to make 'Open' XML (inluding any consensus
       ammendments) an ISO standard.

    3. If the contradictions are *are* maintained, 'Open' XML is off the
       fast track, and has to go through the lengthy and  detailed
       process of normal standardisation.

What I'm unclear about, is what the author means by 'the vote on the
contradiction'.

In this case, is the 'vote':

  1. The mere raising of contradictions?
  2. Some kind of vote on ECMA's proposed 'resolutions' to the 19
     contradictions?
  3. Some kind of vote on whether maintained contradictions are
     accepted?
  4. Something else altogether?

Perhaps Mike Banahan ca help out on this one?

Dave