[Wylug-discuss] MS Office XML and ISO Standardisation

[mikeb at gbdirect.co.uk]

What Dave says is what I understand to be the case.

He then poses the following questions:

>     1. 'Open' XML is still on the fast track, until all the
>        contradictions are dealt with.

Yes it is. The fast track procedure has an open-ended contradiction resolution period so:

> 
>     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.

The 5 months are, as I understand when the contradiction resolution period is closed. I'm not sure what the process is, because that is at ISO level not National Body level.

> 
>     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.

I think that the whole thing is now in terra incognita. As far as I am aware there has rarely or never been a prior case of this happening and it's possible that procedures are being invented in real time.

Bear in mind that I'm a novice on the procedural side of things here. 

> 
> 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?

From what I have read, it would seem to be the case that the people on JTC1 at ISO level figure out what to do.

If ECMA is responding to the contradictions, that's probably courtesy. I believe that a contradiction resolution meeting gets convened and the JTC1 members then try to get agreement that all is sweet and dandy so the fast track can proceed OR they say 'No, the contradictions stand: on your bike mate'.

They are used to working by consensus not by majority voting and a determined National Body (e.g. BSI) NO could veto the whole thing, especially if two or three NBs lined up their arguments.  Again, that's my understanding only.

If someone wanted to affect the BSI side of this, big guns would need to be brought in. For example someone with a tame MP could brief the MP on what's happening and that MP (ideally someone on the public accounts committee or with DTI or treasury links) would ask as a matter of urgency to speak to the BSI on a matter of public policy interest. BSI is mostly funded through the DTI I'm led to believe. Questions about what the BSI is doing to ensure proper stakeholder representation and to avoid an abuse of process (for example, stuffing the working groups with vested interests) might cause them to sit up and take notice.
The current system whereby anyone with some technical skills can apply to join a working party and then gets a vote is fine while it works but not if someone sets out systematically to abuse it.

How to affect ISO/IEC JTC1 is probably outside the reach of UK lobbying. Causing a substantial stir in the press would increase the pressure on them and my guess is that the good news for those who think the Office Open XML proposal needs to be stopped is that the 'safe' option for JTC1 is to require it to be submitted via 'Committee Draft (CD)' (i.e. the normal lengthy standards process). That would essentially kick the thing into the long grass for years, because doing a fine-toothed-comb review of 6,000 odd pages takes geological time. The few hundred pages of C++ took something like ten years (from memory, I could be wrong).
Even C took four to five years and that wasn't far from saying 'Yeah, Kernighan and Ritchie with function prototypes from C++, dude'.

In the meantime, ODF would have a chance to establish itself. I would think that it would be disastrous for OOXML's supporters if it went the CD route, but all bets are off at the moment.

Don't get complacent if you are happy with the current situation. This is a very high-stakes game and the majority of the players are very inexperienced about wwhat to do if the situation changes from nerdy technical stuff to highly-funded politicking. If YOU saw billions of revenues at risk here, what would you do in the circumstances? The going may get very nasty from here on in.

Mike
-- 
Mike Banahan - http://www.gbdirect.co.uk - Tel 0870 200 7273, Mobile 07970 942590
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://list.wylug.org.uk/pipermail/wylug-discuss/attachments/20070207/d570f1a6/attachment.bin