[Chapter-delegates] ooXML

[Michiel Leenaars]

Hello Khaled, all, 

in the Netherlands ISOC.nl actually founded the committee (which is
still chaired by myself). I think the outcome of our efforts might be of
interest to you all, as different to other countries and stories we
heard we actually got all but one member to agree with a conditional yes
(i.e. a no with resolvable issues). Microsoft singlehandedly blocked the
decision and caused the Netherlands to bail out of the process.

Please find the full account below. The online version lives here:

http://isoc.nl/michiel/nodecisiononOOXML.htm

Best regards,
Michiel Leenaars
Director ISOC.nl
--------------

 	
ISOC.nl regrets absence of Netherlands decision on OOXML

On August 16th 2007 the final meeting of NEN NC 381034 "Behandeling en
uitwisseling van tekst", the Netherlands' mirror committee of ISO/JTC 1
SC 34 resulted in an "abstain without comments" which places the
Netherlands outside of the remainder of the DIS 29500 process.

Since the start of DIS 29500 the Netherlands committee worked very hard
for several months in a constructive and positive manner on taking away
the technical and legal concerns that lived among members of the
committee. The committee can be commended for its professional and
correct disregard of the international turbulence around this specific
standard [1], and working towards a joint result worthy of the ISO
process.

The result of this intensive process was that during the last meeting
on the subject on August 16th 2007 in Delft - where the vote was to be
cast - after a majority rejection of a proposal for an "Approval" a
final proposal for a so called conditional approval (i.e.: a no vote
that would turn into a yes vote if a number of reasonable and already
determined conditions were met at the next stage) almost got unanimous
support - from all but the local support branch of Microsoft. This
isolated position caused the vote to fail and the Netherlands to
automatically vote for an "Abstain".

From the view of the international standardisation process Internet
Society feels that a submitting organisation of a standard should not
actively seek to influence the local decision process in such a way.
There were no technical reasons and therefore the vote by
Microsoft should be considered a tactical and predetermined vote, best
characterised by the fact that Microsoft staff had told journalists
already some hours before the meeting that the Netherlands were going
to vote abstain. A prewritten press release by Microsoft sent out
immediately after the meeting mentions also an "Abstain", but was not
updated to the surprising factual outcome of the meeting - which was
that the technical comments and problems that were unilaterally agreed
upon by the committee will not be submitted to ISO.

This surprising result was the outcome of a lenghty discussion on
whether or not it was fair to those members that had submitted several
more controversial comments earlier that - without consensus on the
compromise that had been worked on for months - these comments would
not be included. This included some fundamental comments such as the
mandatory use of ISO date codes, exclusive usage of the Gregorian
calender (according to ISO 681), problems with intellectual property
rights, etc). In addition some felt that during the process they had
agreed on many comments to be ameliorated in order to come to that same
compromise. Without that compromise they would stick to the original
version. The committee subsequently failed to get consensus on sending
all comments and therefore it will now not share any of its findings
with ISO.

The result of both decisions (no vote, no comments) is that the
Netherlands places itself out fo the rest of the decision process and
will no longer play any role in the further process of ISO/JTC1 DIS
29500. Internet Society share the view of many that Microsoft Open XML
DIS 29500 was not mature for the ISO process yet. Work within the
Netherlands committee was very focussed on contributing to technically
improving Office Open XML to make it ready for standardisation.
Internet Society Netherlands as the longest sitting member on the
Netherlands standardisation committee NEN NC 381034 "Behandeling en
uitwisseling van tekst", regrets this outcome as there were some unique
and techically relevant comments and technical solutions for the future
of OOXML as a potential international standard that will not be used as
such.

ISOC.nl recommends that the ISO procedures - and more specific the Fast
Track procedure - be adapted significantly to better deal with
processes like this standard in order to maintain relevant. This
includes demanding two interoperable and independent full
implementations prior to accepting a submission for a Fast Track
procedure.

The Hague, August 17th 2007
Michiel Leenaars, NEN NC 381034 committee member
Director ISOC.nl

------------
[1] In a number of countries like the USA, Italy, Switzerland and
    Portugal much heated controversy arose around committeedressing and
    outside manipulation of votes within the process. There was also
    controversy around a money prize announced by a private foundation
    for the person or organisation to find the best arguments for
    national bodies to influence the standards process. The Netherlands
    committee distanced itself univocally from such activities and took
    proper precautions to block any such behaviour during this
    procedure.