Office Open XML Intermediate 5 Month Ballot Results

Office Open XML Intermediate 5 Month Ballot Results

During the standardization of Office Open XML, Ecma International submitted its Office Open XML File Formats standard (ECMA-376) to the ISO Fast Track process. After a comment period, the ISO held a ballot that closed September 2007. This has been observed to be perhaps the most controversial and unusual ISO ballot ever convened, both in the number of comments in opposition, and in unusual actions during the voting process. Various factions have strongly supported and opposed this fast track process. On the supporting side were primarily Microsoft affiliated companies; on the opposing side were free- or open-source software organizations, IBM and affiliates, Sun Microsystems, and Google.

There have been reports of attempted vote buying,[1][2][3][4] heated verbal confrontations, refusal to come to consensus and other very unusual behavior in national standards bodies.[5][6][7][8] This is said to be unprecedented for standards bodies, which usually act together and have generally worked to resolve concerns amicably.

87 ISO member countries responded to the five-month ballot. There were 51 votes of "approval", 18 votes of "disapproval" and 18 abstentions.[9] For the measure to pass, 23 of "P" members (participating, as opposed to "O" members: observing) must approve and less than 14 of all voting national members (excluding members that abstain from voting) must disapprove. The ballot shows 53% approval by "P" members and 26% disapproval from the total votes.

Results

The following table shows the results by member of the balloting that ended 2 September 2007:[10]

Country Standards Body Membership Vote
Argentina IRAM O Member Abstention
Chile INN O Member Abstention
Israel SII O Member Abstention
Luxembourg SEE O Member Abstention
Mexico DGN O Member Abstention
Peru INDECOPI O Member Abstention
Viet Nam TCVN O Member Abstention
Australia SA P Member Abstention
Belgium NBN P Member Abstention
Finland SFS P Member Abstention
Italy UNI P Member Abstention
Malaysia DSM P Member Abstention
Netherlands NEN P Member Abstention
Slovenia SIST P Member Abstention
Spain AENOR P Member Abstention
Trinidad and Tobago TTBS P Member Abstention
Mauritius MSB Abstention
Zimbabwe SAZ Abstention
Armenia SARM O Member Approval
Belarus BELST O Member Approval
Costa Rica INTECO O Member Approval
Croatia HZN O Member Approval
Cuba NC O Member Approval
Egypt EOS O Member Approval
Morocco SNIMA O Member Approval
Romania ASRO O Member Approval
Russian Federation GOST R O Member Approval
Serbia ISS O Member Approval
Sri Lanka SLSI O Member Approval
Ukraine DSSU O Member Approval
Azerbaijan AZSTAND P Member Approval
Côte-d'Ivoire CODINORM P Member Approval
Cyprus CYS P Member Approval
Jamaica JBS P Member Approval
Kazakhstan KAZMEMST P Member Approval
Lebanon LIBNOR P Member Approval
Pakistan PSQCA P Member Approval
Saudi Arabia SASO P Member Approval
Bangladesh BSTI Approval
Barbados BNSI Approval
Bosnia and Herzegovina BAS Approval
Congo, The Democratic Republic of OCC Approval
Fiji FTSQCO Approval
Kuwait KOWSMD Approval
Nigeria SON Approval
Panama COPANIT Approval
Qatar QS Approval
Syrian Arab Republic SASMO Approval
Tanzania, United Rep. of TBS Approval
United Arab Emirates ESMA Approval
Uzbekistan UZSTANDARD Approval
Austria ON O Member Approval with comments
Bulgaria BDS O Member Approval with comments
Colombia ICONTEC O Member Approval with comments
Greece ELOT O Member Approval with comments
Poland PKN O Member Approval with comments
Portugal IPQ O Member Approval with comments
Tunisia INNORPI O Member Approval with comments
Germany DIN P Member Approval with comments
Kenya KEBS P Member Approval with comments
Malta MSA P Member Approval with comments
Singapore SPRING SG P Member Approval with comments
Switzerland SNV P Member Approval with comments
Turkey TSE P Member Approval with comments
Uruguay UNIT P Member Approval with comments
Venezuela FONDONORMA P Member Approval with comments
USA ANSI Secretariat Approval with comments
Ghana GSB Approval with comments
Jordan JISM Approval with comments
Brazil ABNT O Member Disapproval
Philippines BPS O Member Disapproval
Thailand TISI O Member Disapproval
Canada SCC P Member Disapproval
China SAC P Member Disapproval
Czech Republic CNI P Member Disapproval
Denmark DS P Member Disapproval
Ecuador INEN P Member Disapproval
France AFNOR P Member Disapproval
India BIS P Member Disapproval
Iran, Islamic Republic of ISIRI P Member Disapproval
Ireland NSAI P Member Disapproval
Japan JISC P Member Disapproval
Korea, Republic of KATS P Member Disapproval
New Zealand SNZ P Member Disapproval
Norway SN P Member Disapproval
South Africa SABS P Member Disapproval
United Kingdom BSI P Member Disapproval

Reconsideration of votes

On 25–29 February 2008, a Ballot Resolution Meeting was held in Geneva, Switzerland, to consider revisions to the OOXML proposal. Under ISO rules, national standards bodies have thirty days following the Ballot Resolution Meeting to reconsider and possibly change their votes.

Belgium
The Belgian Bureau de Normalisation considered the revisions, but failed to reach a consensus on the proposal. Belgium's initial abstention therefore stood.[11]
Czech Republic
The Český Normalizační Institut considered the revisions and changed its initial vote against the proposal to a vote in favour.[12]
Germany
The Normenausschusses Informationstechnik und Anwendungen considered the revisions and reaffirmed Germany's initial vote for the proposal.[13]
India
The Bureau of Indian Standards considered the revisions and reaffirmed India's initial vote against the proposal.[14]
Netherlands
The Netherlands Standardization Institute (NEN) considered the revisions and reaffirmed the Netherlands' initial abstention.[15]
Trinidad and Tobago
The Trinidad and Tobago Bureau of Standards announced that it will change its initial abstention to a vote for the revised proposal.[16]
United States
The International Committee on Information Technology Standards (INCITS) considered the revisions and reaffirmed the U.S.'s initial vote for the proposal.[17]

References

  1. ^ Kim Haverblad (27 August 2007). "Microsoft buys the Swedish vote on OOXML". OS2World. http://www.os2world.com/content/view/14868/1/. 
  2. ^ Daniel Goldberg (29 August 2007). "Microsoft pressade partners att rösta ja [Microsoft pressed partners to vote yes]". IDG.se. http://www.idg.se/2.1085/1.118337.  (Swedish)
  3. ^ Jason Matusow (30 Aug 2007). "Open XML - The Vote in Sweden". http://blogs.msdn.com/jasonmatusow/archive/2007/08/29/open-xml-the-vote-in-sweden.aspx. 
  4. ^ Kim Haverblad (30 August 2007). "The Swedish OOXML vote has been declared invalid!". OS2World. http://www.os2world.com/content/view/14874/2/. 
  5. ^ ISOC.nl regrets absence of Netherlands decision on OOXML. Internet Society Netherlands press release, 17 August 2007.
  6. ^ FSFE formal objection to the UK14 meeting. Free Software Foundation Europe. 13 August 2007.
  7. ^ Swiss Internet User Group. Letter to SNV Schweizerische Normen-Vereinigung. 14 August 2007.
  8. ^ Yusseri Yusoff (5 September 2007). "OOXML is not (yet) an ISO standard, as Malaysia votes "No" ... or did we?". Open Malaysia. Archived from the original on 27 September 2009. http://web.archive.org/web/20090927204426/http://www.openmalaysiablog.com/2007/09/ooxml-is-not-ye.html. 
  9. ^ "Vote closes on draft ISO/IEC DIS 29500 standard". ISO. 4 September 2007. http://www.iso.org/iso/pressrelease.htm?refid=Ref1070. 
  10. ^ JTC1 SC34 download of ballots (ZIP)
  11. ^ Bruno Leijnse (25 March 2008). "La Belgique s'abstient à propos d'OOxml [Belgium abstains on OOXML]". Data News. http://www.datanews.be/fr/news/90-57-17395/la-belgique-s-abstient-a-propos-d-ooxml.html.  (French)
  12. ^ "Tiskové prohlášení ČNI k návrhu mezinárodní normy ISO IEC DIS 29500". Český Normalizační Institut. http://www.cni.cz/NP/NotesPortalCNI.nsf/key/informace~oznameni_a_informace~tiskove_prohlaseni_cni_k_navrhu_mezinarodni_normy_iso_iec_dis_29500?Open. [dead link] (Czech)
  13. ^ "Zankapfel Dokumentenaustauschformat". eGovernment Computing. 18 March 2008. http://www.egovcom.de/srvinclude/4/1/inews_daily.asp?opt=archiv&red_nr=18255. [dead link] (German)
  14. ^ Abhimanyu Radhakrishnan (20 March 2008). "Breaking news: India's final vote on MS Office file standard is 'NO'". Tech2.com India. http://www.tech2.com/india/news/software/breaking-news-indias-final-vote-on-ms-office-file-standard-is-no/32081/0. 
  15. ^ Jan Rietveld. "Nederlands standpunt 'Office Open XML file formats' verandert niet". Netherlands Standardization Institute. Archived from the original on 2 June 2008. http://web.archive.org/web/20080602222237/http://www2.nen.nl/nen/servlet/dispatcher.Dispatcher?id=253848&parentid=000009.  (Dutch)
  16. ^ "Trinidad and Tobago Bureau of Standards votes approval of DIS29500". Trinidad and Tobago Computer Society. 22 March 2008. http://ttcs.wordpress.com/2008/03/22/trinidad-and-tobago-bureau-of-standards-votes-approval-of-dis29500/. 
  17. ^ "Vote Tally for INCITSLB2558". International Committee on Information Technology Standards. http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=vote&committee=INCITS&ballot_id=2558. [dead link]

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

Игры ⚽ Поможем решить контрольную работу

Look at other dictionaries:

  • Seattle — This article is about the city. For other uses, see Seattle (disambiguation). Seattle   City   City of Seattle …   Wikipedia

  • New Order of Cincinnatus — The New Order of Cincinnatus (NOOC) was a young men s political organization established in Seattle, Washington in the 1930s. The short lived conservative and moralistic reform group [1] was a municipal party that challenged both the Democratic… …   Wikipedia

Share the article and excerpts

Direct link
Do a right-click on the link above
and select “Copy Link”