[Wylug-discuss] MS Office Open XML ISO standard fast track

[Dave Fisher]

On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 10:20:31AM +0000, Phil Driscoll wrote:
> Groklaw readers may have already seen this excellent document
> http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections
> detailing the absurd mess which is the Ecma 376 Office Open XML standard 
> currently being fast tracked through the ISO process.
> 
> As I understand it, National standards bodies have until Friday to lodge any 
> objections to the fast tracking. In the UK, the BSI need to be encouraged to 
> object to the fast tracking process so that the standard is discussed in 
> committee, where I would hope that sanity will prevail and the 6000 pages of 
> junk will receive the treatment it deserves.
> 
> If you feel strongly about this and have some time today, please email one of 
> the BSI representatives with your views. Contact details are at
> http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_Contacts#UNITED_KINGDOM_.28BSI.29
> 
> I emailed francis at franciscave.com who is Chairman or the BSI IST/41 committee. 
> From the BSI website:
> 
>  "IST/41 is responsible for document description and processing languages and
>   represents the UK in the work of the International Committee: ISO/IEC JTC
>   1/SC 34, which maintains and develops standards for SGML (and extentions to
>   support HTML and XML), DSDL, HyTime, ISMID and presentation standards such
>   as SPDL and DSSSL"
> 
> He has passed my email on to the rest of his committee and to the chair of 
> ICT/-/1, the committee responsible for responding for the UK position on the 
> initial review of ECMA-376.

Well done Phil.

I'd like to strongly encourage other wylug members to follow Phil's lead
on this, ASAP ... time is of the essence here!

I've sent my own email to Francis Cave (quoted below).

I'm not certain that I've made the right arguments, or even set the
right tone, but I figure that part of the purpose of writing to the BSI
IST/41 committee is to draw it's attention to the shere quantity/depth
of our objection ... *in time*! 

As I hope you'll see, I've tried to emphasise my objection to immediate
'Fast Tracking', rather than to the substance of ECMA-376.

This simply a question or priorities: 

  If we get the proposal off the fast track, we win the time and the
  means to lobby for revisions or even rejection.

Additionally, I've tried to:

  1. Avoid any gratuitous anti-Microsoft or anti-Office comments

  2. Show how accepting ECMA-376 as an ISO standard would directly harm
     me and my work.

If you are planning to write, please do not simply use the example below
with variable substitution.

I've only quoted it to illustrate what I think may be useful tactics and
priorities, i.e.

  1. Get as many objections in as possible in as soon as possible.

  2. Object to fast tracking above all.

  3. Remind the committee that a rushed job on a bad proposal will have
  serious negative consequences for real people.

  4. Make our initial objections seem as minimal, moderate and
     reasonable as possible.

Dave

=====================================================================

>> Dear Francis,
>> 
>> I don't imagine that I'm the first to do so, but I would like to
>> encourage the IST/41 committee to object to fast tracking Ecma 376
>> (Office Open XML) into an ISO standard.
>> 
>> As the detailed argument at
>> http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections demonstrates, the
>> current proposal is so deeply and comprehensively flawed, that it
>> requires far more detailed scrutiny and revision than the fast track
>> process would allow.
>> 
>> I work as a consultant and trainer in web technologies. Many, sometimes
>> most, of the everyday problems I face have roots in inadequate
>> standardardisation or in the misinterpretation of otherwise adequate
>> interoperability standards.
>> 
>> The injection of non-standard content and metadata (in undocumented and
>> contradictory formats) into HTML/XHTML and XML is among the most common
>> of these problems.
>> 
>> Fast tracking Ecma 376 directly into an ISO standard would make this
>> situation infinitely worse, by endorsing a format which contradicts many
>> existing standards (web and XML) and which cannot be reliably
>> implemented by vendors other than Microsoft.  
>> 
>> If the proposed format were accepted, there would be no practical way of
>> preventing Microsoft's proprietary formats from poluting otherwise open
>> XML documents, on a grand scale.
>> 
>> Moreover, the incentive for other vendors to pursue ISO endorsement of
>> their own proprietary formats would be irresistable.
>> 
>> It is possible to revise Ecma 376 sufficiently for it to eventually
>> become an adequate ISO standard, but I do not believe that this can be
>> done within the limits of the fast track process.  
>> 
>> Yours sincerely,
>> 
>> David Fisher
>>