OOXML doesn't get support at ISO - Andy Updegrove explains

[Ben Finney]

Ciaran O'Riordan <ciaran at fsfe.org> writes:

> I'm no ISO procedure expert, but my understanding is: after 5 days
> of discussion, the voting members at ISO's Ballot Resolution Meeting
> decided not to approve the OOXML specification. There simply wasn't
> enough time to discuss the numerous problems and the numerous
> proposed solutions. The final decision will be in 30 days time, but
> since the issues raised last September are officially unresolved,
> rejection by ISO is almost certain.

Tim Bray, who was part of the BRM, has a blog post revealing how jaded
he is on the whole matter.

    Summary: A lot of good work was done, but the process is
    irretrievably broken.
    [...]

    What Was Good · The people. With a very few exceptions, everyone
    really tried hard to work together and make the document better.
    [...]

    What Was Bad [...]
    This was horrible, egregious, process abuse and ISO should hang
    their heads in shame for allowing it to happen. Their reputation,
    in my eyes, is in tatters. My opinion of ECMA was already very
    negative; this hasn’t improved it, and if ISO doesn’t figure out
    away to detach this toxic leech, this kind of abuse is going to
    happen again and again.

    <URL:http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2008/02/29/BRM-narrative>

-- 
 \          “Rightful liberty is unobstructed action, according to our |
  `\        will, within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of |
_o__)                                       others.” —Thomas Jefferson |
Ben Finney