ISO and OOXML: Fact and Fancy

Posted by Andy_Updegrove on Feb 13, 2007 7:29 PM EDT Standards Blog; By Andy Updegrove
Mail this story
Print this story

Given that there has been a fair amount of information, disinformation, and supposition flying around, I thought that I should share some additional details that I've learned relating to the contradictions received by JTC 1 regarding Ecma 376 (nee Microsoft OOXML).

In doing so, I'll borrow Stephen O'Grady's trademark Q&A approach again, albeit not as skillfully as he does. Here we go:

Q: I hear that Microsoft's Tom Robertson was quoted in eWeek saying that 103 nations have standards bodies "with the authority to act at the ISO on behalf of that country," and that ,"What we see is that only a small handful have submitted comments." MS' Brian Jones also says at his blog that " It sounds like about 18 of the 100+ countries reviewing the standard came back with comments." So just how big a deal is that, anyway?

A: Well, let's start with the denominator, which is really 66 – not 100+ or 103. Only Principle Members and Observer Members can offer contradictions under the JTC 1 rules, and there are only 27 Principal and 39 Observer Members. By my count, that's 66 – less than 2/3's of Robertson's and Jones' numbers. How about the numerator? Is it 18? Nope. 19? Keep going. It's actually 20.

Q: Hmm. That doesn't send so much like "a handful" when you put it that way.

Full Story

» Read more about: Groups: IBM, KDE, Microsoft, Novell,, Sun

« Return to the newswire homepage

This topic does not have any threads posted yet!

You cannot post until you login.