It's already protested
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| Sander_Marechal Sep 03, 2007 11:31 AM EDT |
As soon as the vote was in, it was contested: http://quest-88.jogger.pl/2007/09/03/en-protest-against-the-... Sadly, we're past the Sept. 2 deadline now, so it can't be changed. |
| Aladdin_Sane Sep 03, 2007 12:18 PM EDT |
It may not matter. A high 2/3 "yes" is required to pass, and a majority are voting "no" or "abstain" so far. There is a vote tally table being updated at http://balanceofcowards.blogspot.com/2007/08/tracking-status... I like the name of the Blog too: Balance of Cowards |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 03, 2007 1:28 PM EDT |
I did some math myself. Good news :-) If you remember, a lot of countries suddently applied for P status (see consortiominfo's standards blog). 11 in total so far. Of those 11 two have voted yes and one no, that we know of. A big Hurray for Equador who seem to have converted to P at the last minute to be able to vote no. But, we can safely assume that those 8 remaining new members are all in MS's pocket and will vore yes. Assuming that, the balance would tip to 15 yes and 13 no, with 8 remaining unknowns. That's a far cry from 2/3. Even if those remaining 8 unknowns all vote yes (which I doubt. My guess is 50/50) then OOXML would still have 23 yes and 13 no which is not enough. It needs 26 yes votes. So, OOXML will fail JTC-1! Even if by a narrow margin! :-D A big kudos to Equador. Without their no vote, MS would only need 24 yes votes which is really too close for comfort (but still not enough). Had Sweden an Denmark been succesfully gamed by MS, it would have had 25 votes and OOXML would have passed. We lost round 1 (Ecma) and 2 (Fast tracking) but won round 3 (JTC-1 vote). Now comes round 4 (SC34 comment resolution). |
| tuxchick Sep 03, 2007 2:53 PM EDT |
It's a sad commentary on the process, regardless. The various committees and standards bodies were all too easily subverted, and too willing to roll over at the scent of money. |
| techiem2 Sep 03, 2007 3:33 PM EDT |
So how long until MS appeals and claims that the vote was unfairly stacked against them? (yes, we all know it was MS who was doing the stacking, but they'll probably figure out a way to spin things around anyway) |
| Aladdin_Sane Sep 03, 2007 3:43 PM EDT |
>>So, OOXML will fail JTC-1! MS-OOXML will fail the JTC1 Fast Track, in this case given these conditions, yes. I don't know of anything preventing the ECMA from resubmitting on the Slow Track, or whatever they call it. (Slow Train to Nowhere?) Quote from another board on the subject, "I'm not convinced that we can call in the Munchkin Coroner..." |
| jezuch Sep 03, 2007 4:09 PM EDT |
It's interesting, that I haven't seen Poland on the various list of P-countries recently posted. Is their (ours, for me, actually [*ashamed*]) vote valid then? Anyway, there seems to be a shortage of decision makers with brains in here. Fortunately the common people have long and rich tradition of living despite the government, not thanks to it ;) |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 04, 2007 12:23 AM EDT |
Quoting:I don't know of anything preventing the ECMA from resubmitting on the Slow Track, or whatever they call it. If that would happen, it would take years and years before OOXML makes it though. ODF will gobble up the (governmental) market in that time. OOXML's best chance is to turn enough P votes from no to yes (and add more P members that will vote yes) before the February 25 BMR and JTC-1 re-vote. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!