Home > Standards Blog

Advanced Search 

Welcome to ConsortiumInfo.org
Thursday, March 23 2017 @ 11:15 PM CDT

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Showdown in Geneva: Most OOXML Dispositions Fail to Achieve Majority Approval at BRM
Authored by: Andy Updegrove on Thursday, March 06 2008 @ 08:36 AM CST
James,

This is pretty much what I expected was the case; given the length of the meeting and the brevity of the notes, they seem primarily intended to give a modest amount of context for  the resolutions that were formally moved and adopted or failed.  It would have been particularly interesting to have seen more detail on the discussions relating to the final ballot.  i note, for example, that "Option 3" isn't even described.

  -  Andy
[ Parent | # ]
Showdown in Geneva: Most OOXML Dispositions Fail to Achieve Majority Approval at BRM
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 06 2008 @ 10:24 AM CST
Does the 'edited' nature of these notes go far enough to qualify as bias ?  As propaganda ?

Can we take these notes as accurate ?

Can we take these notes as complete ?

Your post suggests that there are some (many?) missing dispositions (both passed and failed) as well as missing resolutions to dispositions (either rejected or denied a hearing) that never made it into these notes.

If any of the above is close to accurate, what is the purpose of Alex Brown's publication of these notes ?  Propaganda to 'appease the masses' ?  Cause delay until it becomes too late to do anything about the end-of-month vote ?

If these public 'minutes' of the BRM are anything like those sent to the NBs, how can we be sure the NBs are getting accurate (and complete) data about the changes to the DIS made by the BRM ?  Are we being fed mis-information or incomplete information ?

-- Ed
[ Parent | # ]