NoOOXML

ECMA (essentially a Microsoft proxy) has published a document to counter all the contradictions submitted by countries against the Fast Track. This document can be seen as the core of the counter-arguments by Microsoft to convince National Bodies that OOXML is a good thing. A very informative document on which arguments Microsoft will use to discuss with other stakehoders during the forthcoming meetings.

We have more then 104 countries, and we don't know what is happening in most of them. What about Pakistan? Oman? Iraq? Russia? Will they vote? When is the deadline to submit comments? I mean one country, one vote is the rule, so every country is important. Let's call your Standardisation Body to find out what is happening...

The petition started last thursday got 10.000 signatures in less than a week. Remember that signing the petition is only a first step, it is more important to submit comments to your standardisation body.

The Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII), said that it was putting up a 2,500 Euro prize in its fight against Microsoft's attempt to gain international standardisation for its Office format.

The SIUG (Swiss Internet User Group) as well as the Brussels Linux User Group (BxLUG) have sent comments to their National Standardisation Bodies before the deadline.

The DIN Deutsches Institut für Normung e. V. is calling for interested people to participate in this work

Rumors coming from differents sources are mentioning that Intel is supporting OOXML in some countries, and want to defend the application of the standard to become an ISO norm. Intel and Microsoft used to be a good tandem in the past, and they are still probably in tandem today. Intel was also an ECMA member, and voted for the ECMA-376 specification.

FSFE is asking 6 questions to all standardisation bodies: "The following six questions relate to the application of the ECMA/MS-OOXML format to be accepted as an IEC/ISO standard. Unless a national standardisation body has conclusive answers to all of them, it should vote no in IEC/ISO and request that Microsoft incorporate its work on MS-OOXML into ISO/IEC 26300:2006 (Open Document Format)."

I invite you to read the comment on my previous post in Denmark, where I was suspecting all of those companies to be Microsoft puppets. I was not far from the truth.

OOXML is now ready for public hearing in Denmark. Comments must be sent to Dansk Standard by july 2nd 2007. For comments form please contact Pia Elleby Lange. Next meeting in committee is scheduled for juli 11th 2007 at 10:00 AM at Dansk Standard.

Thanks to the efforts of Guillaume Allègre, french readers can have access to the translation of the Rob Weir paper in French. It will be useful for french speaking countries, such as Belgium, France, Canada, Algeria, Congo, Côte-d'Ivoire, Luxembourg, Morocco, Tunisia or Switzerland.

IBM has submitted some technical comments at CNI, the Czech National Institute. Those comments are available online. Normally, there is a form you have to fill in all other countries in order to submit comments to your National Standardisation Body.

Alberto Barrionuevo has made another banner against the broken and fake OOXML standard: Not Open, Not XML, Not Standard. See the banners page and put it on your website!

I have just created an online helpdesk on IRC in order to get some support and advices from other people who wants to submit comments to their National Standardisation Bodies, or launch a campaign against OOXML in their country.

There are several things that needs to be clarified urgently: when is the deadline in the 104 countries members of ISO to submit comments on OOXML? We need people to email or call directly their National Standardization Body in order to know when is the deadline to submit comments, and if there are physical meetings organized.

Rob Weir is explaining in 10 pages why the proposed OOXML standard should be rejected, and why it conflicts with existing ISO standards. An extract: "OOXML, however, incorporates very little of the consolidated best practices of the industry. Worse, would-be implementors of OOXML are asked to use Microsoft's proprietary, legacy formats, even when relevant and superior W3C standards are at hand."

Mark Shuttleworth of Ubuntu in an interview with ZDNet: "I have no confidence in Microsoft's Open XML specification to deliver a vibrant, competitive and healthy market of multiple implementations. I don't believe that the specifications are good enough, nor that Microsoft will hold itself to the specification when it does not suit the company to do so," Shuttleworth said. OpenDocument Format, or ODF, is better, and Microsoft should improve its support for that standard, he said.

Rumors are being spread that Microsoft is forcing its Gold Partners in Belgium to endorse the specification to become an ISO standard. We just hope that Microsoft will be more intelligent then just asking them to sign the same letters that they sent to the ANSI in the United States... The deadline for submitting comments in Belgium is the 25 June, and there will be a meeting at the IBN on the 29 June.

An extract on the Microsoft spam letter sent to ANSI: "Even though this is a form letter from Microsoft I thought I would add this personal touch. I understand that there is a monetary drive from Microsoft in allowing Open XML to become an ISO standard, but I have to say that if this is not added to the standard that many small businesses may be forced to go back and have many of their web applications retooled to function under the new standards at great expense the them." An impressive list of spam comments asking for supporting OOXML and backward compatibility, claiming also that "Open XML in no way contradicts any other international document standard". No really?

Rick Jelliffe: "I think by now most people are pretty phlegmatic about accepting various assertions about Open XML and ODF on face value. The sky is not falling. The boy is crying wolf. A seive is full of holes no matter how loudly someone shouts that it is a bucket."