Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

MS-OOXML Fails to Gain Approval in US

(1/1)

zridling:
It's only strike one, but the first attempt to approve MS-OOXML for ISO certification on behalf of the US national body failed late last week. It's not over until it's really over, so be sure to read the comments to temper the headline, especially the parts on how Microsoft has worked overtime to pack the national bodies with its employees and business partners.
________________________________________________
In related news
ITworld.com - Microsoft OOXML spec "dangerously flawed"
"Microsoft’s Office Open XML (OOXML) document format specification is fatally flawed where it comes to spreadsheets, with many functions filled with careless errors, according to a critic."

V1 committee gives thumbs down to Open XML doc spec
"...a number of countries argued that the Open XML proposal conflicts and overlaps with a previously established standard -- ODF -- and is poorly written and technically unsound."

Standards Org Deals a Blow Against Microsoft's OOXML Format
"The group which recommends the way the U.S. votes on international technical standards failed to approve Microsoft's Open Office XML office document format."

Microsoft open XML standard faces setback
"Given that pressure from many companies and governments has pushed them to creating an open standard, they have been working to doing just that – the Microsoft way."

OOXML Denied INCITS V1 Approval
Among the obstacles vis-a-vis ODF, MS-OOXML faces:
    — MS-OOXML is controlled by one company, not a standards body.
    — Microsoft likes proprietary formats and has only gone the open format route because the market/industry forced them to do so.
    — Microsoft was invited several times to join the ODF standards committee and refused all invitations.
    — MS-OOXML is not actually open for anyone to implement: part of the specification references proprietary file formats (older ms-office formats)
             and proprietary, binary code interdependencies off-limits to anyone else.

And here's more, for argument's sake via the Free Software Foundation Europe:
http://www.noooxml.org/arguments
http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections
http://www.xmlopen.org/ooxml-wiki/index.php/DIS_29500_Comments

Carol Haynes:
Isn't ISO a French organisation - I thought ANSI was the US equivalent?

steeladept:
Isn't ISO a French organisation - I thought ANSI was the US equivalent?
-Carol Haynes (July 16, 2007, 11:07 AM)
--- End quote ---
No, ISO is international.  ANSI is the US branch of ISO.  The EU also has a branch, but I can't remember off hand what it's designator is.

-EDIT- It is actually based on National Standard bodies as outlined in the quote below.  ANSI is the US National Standards Body.

In general, each country or economy has a single recognized Standards Body (NSB). Examples include ABNT, ANSI, BSI, DGN, DIN, IRAM, JISC, KATS, SABS, SAC, SCC, SIS, SNZ. An NSB is likely the sole member from that economy in ISO.-Wikipedia
--- End quote ---

gjehle:
a lot of standards are the same for each standards body.
eg. quality assurance  is ISO 9000 (9002, 9004, etc) (international), or DIN 9000 (german), or EN 9000 (european) and often gets a long name like DIN EN ISO 9000 or similar.

Navigation

[0] Message Index