Home > Standards Blog

Advanced Search 

Welcome to ConsortiumInfo.org
Sunday, February 26 2017 @ 01:47 PM CST

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Give the man a break E-Man !
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 04 2008 @ 07:35 PM CST
Thank you for that information, Andy.

Do you have any feel for the impact of the various press and 'internet buzz' one way or another ?

My concerns are as follows:

   1. The MS marketing engine prematurely declares victory and does so loudly enough and often enough that (repeating a lie often enough makes it true) their version becomes 'conventional wisdom'.
   2. Meanwhile, official information is lacking so there is no way to counter this media blitz with true facts (because there aren't any).
   3. The changes & draft are *SO* large that whatever report with edits is inevitably delayed just due to the pure size of the DIS+changes and a need to verify the accuracy of the post-BRM draft.
   4. Every day the official report is postponed is one less day for NBs to review the revision.  Both the generation of the revision (or even a report of the revisions) and the review and assimilation of the revised draft need as much time as possible (and the clock is ticking).
   5. Should any NB appeals be filed due to the discussions either here or on Groklaw based on the JTC 1 not following its own rules, there could be a *huge* impact on the revised DIS (Take for example that the last vote gets invalidated and those edits are all ruled as 'fail' due to lack of consensus - the revisions would have to be backed out.  Should the O-Members get ruled as 'non-votes' the big-ballot vote results may change drastically with corresponding impacts on the revised draft that may have already been sent out to the NBs).  You see what I mean...
   6. After all the internet buzz and after MS has already announced its 'win' to their business partners, I suspect that economic pressures from those same business partners will not look kindly upon the JTC 1 results *finally* being published and indicating that due to irregularities, the BRM is a failure and the OOXML DIS has failed (for example).  Consider the case in Denmark that is already declaring OOXML an 'open approved format' for government documents.
   7. Will the NBs that did not attend the BRM have any time at all to review this monster spec before their vote is due ?  Will they know what to review ?  (Remember the mis-information spread to NBs that they *only* needed to review their own comments as preparation, then got a last-minute requirement to vote on everything...)
   8. On a different vein, is the presence of MS employees on so many delegations of concern to anyone but myself.  Do these people not have the decency or integrity to recuse themselves due to conflict of interest ?
   9. The more I think about it, the more I'm bothered by a statement made in either the OpenMalaysia or the Greek blog that Brian Jones (from Microsoft) made a last-minute (Friday afternoon?) proposal that the BRM be 'interoperable' with the ECMA recommendation.  This is the type of conflict of interest I meant in my previous item.  Such 'interoperability' would basically require that no change can be allowed that prevents Microsoft's ability to continue utilizing it's proprietary protocols & undocumented features.  This in turn prevents any hope of interoperability because it allows Microsoft to utilize it's Office 2007 market share to either demand royalties of any and all interoperable products for the use of their precious IP that is *not* covered under the OSP (referenced in the spec or reverse-engineered if macros, etc).  It would also allow MS to not bother to 'fix' MSO2k7 to make it open or interoperable with standards, but to take the 'deprecated' approach which is really not interoperable with any other implementation.
   10. I get the distinct impression that MS already has a multi-million-dollar advertising blitz primed and ready to go, just waiting for the final approval of their shiny, brand-spanking-new ISO stamp-of-approval.  I hope I'm wrong, but I fear I'm not.

--Ed
[ Parent | # ]