<incom> OOXML and the Politics of Standardization

[Felipe Fonseca]

I have not heard about this kind of articulation either,
but free software people were struggling for brasilian
vote. it was a tight decision: 27 no vs. 24 yes.

efe

On 9/9/07, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> wrote:
> Dear Soenke
>
> I am not aware of an actual campaign.. but I do know
> from pro-FOSS friends within the South African
> government that they networked with their counterparts in
> India and Brazil.
>
> I don't think it is entirely coincidence that all three
> countries voted 'no'.
>
> Anriette
>
>
> > While the status of OOXML is still uncertain (the issue is back on the
> > table in Feb 2008), it seems that standardization processes have been
> > politicized to an unprecedented extent, raising questions as to
> > whether standardization bodies are in fact prepared to mediate these
> > kinds of infopolitical conflicts. The breakdown of the votes does in
> > some sense reflect the 'new south' that has been discussed as a
> > placeholder for some kind of post-developmentalist cartography; beyond
> > the petition/info campaign at <http://www.noooxml.org/> I have not
> > seen any specifically 'south-south' campaign against the proposed
> > standard, however, is anyone aware of one? It would be an interesting
> > example of whether the 'new/global south' idea has already translated
> > into specific (infopolitical) alliances,
> >
> > Soenke
> >
> > http://blogs.freecode.no/isene/2007/09/07/an-open-letter-to-iso/
> >
> > Is it time to standardize ISO? [via FOSS-PDI]
> >
> > In light of the recent events relating to the standardization process
> > of EOOXML, it seems appropriate to look into possible standardization
> > of the process itself.
> >
> > The DIS 29500 (EOOXML) process has revealed several shortcomings, both
> > on the national level and on the level of ISO.
> >
> > The organisations representing each country have very different
> > procedures for determining the nations vote in ISO. Some countries
> > will vote only if their technical committee is unanimous on the issue.
> > Others will reach consensus defined by a 3/4 majority vote or even 2/3
> > majority. In some countries there is no vote and the technical
> > committee is only advisory to the national standards organisation.
> > Others yet have a two-stage process where the nations vote is
> > determined through two committees. In short there is no standard for
> > accepting a standard.
> >
> > It seems ISO is not prepared for a politicized process where a big and
> > influential commercial enterprise will use any means possible to push
> > its own standard through to certification.
> >
> > Committees are flooded by the vendor in support of the standard. Votes
> > are bought and results are hijacked. Several national bodies have
> > flawed and skewed procedures open for corruption.
> >
> > The list is much longer, but a few examples should suffice:
> >
> > Norway - originally a process decided by unanimity but altered on the
> > fly Sweden - voting seats bought and the result thus hijacked
> > Switzerland - process rigged in favor of the vendor, the chairman
> > excluded the option of voting "reject" or "reject, with
> > comments" Portugal - process skewed by blaming on lack of available
> > chairs Malaysia - two committees voted unanimously "rejection with
> > comments" and mysteriously overturned by the government to
> > "abstain"
> >
> > Even if this is the tip of an ice berg, the examples should warrant a
> > thorough examination of the national processes.
> >
> > The fact that ISO enforces no standard for national bodies opens the
> > standardization process for manipulation or corruption. I strongly
> > urge ISO to adopt a strict policy for its members detailing the rules
> > for how a national body shall determine its vote in ISO and that it
> > enforces such policy vigorously.
> >
> > On the level of ISO, criticism has been raised against the fast track
> > process. An investigation should be called to see if EOOXML was unduly
> > put on the ISO Fast Track.
> >
> > During the Fast Track, many new countries have joined as P-Members
> > (Participating members) in the technical committee, the JTC1. Several
> > of the countries have no credible track on standardization work, have
> > joined very late in the process only to vote an unconditional
> > "Yes" to a standard that has obvious room for improvement. It may
> > be purely coincidental that the countries that came late in the
> > process score much lower on the Corruption Perception Index by
> > Transparency International. It is possible to corrupt the process by
> > pressuring countries to join a process and vote without sufficient
> > knowledge. I urge ISO to adopt a policy that P-members may not be
> > accepted later than 3 months before the committee is to vote.
> >
> > It may be time also to reevaluate the one country one vote principle.
> > In ISO, the Chinese vote carries the same weight as that of Cyprus. In
> > the JTC1/SC34 the late-comers includes Trinidad and Tobago, Colombia,
> > Côte-d´Ivoire, Cyprus, Lebanon and Malta.
> >
> > As for approving standards within the field of IT, ISO would greatly
> > benefit from adopting the IETF requirment of two independent reference
> > implementations for passing a standard. This should increase the
> > quality of ISO´s IT standards.
> >
> > The strength, integrity and scalability of ISO have been tested. The
> > organizations agility and adaptability will now be measured. May ISO
> > move quickly to fix its own PR and more importantly its own
> > standardization process.
> >
> > The publicity that ISO has been given through the DIS 29500 process is
> > phenomenal. ISO and standardization in general has reached a peak in
> > public awareness. I hope the organization will use this publicity to
> > show strong integrity and potential.
> >
> > The intent of this letter is to safeguard future standardization and
> > to ensure that the processes scale in the face of increased pressure
> > from large commercial interests.
> >
> > Geir Isene
> > CEO FreeCode International
> >
> > <http://www.iso.org/iso/pressrelease.htm?refid=Ref1070>
> > Ref.: 1070
> >
> > Vote closes on draft ISO/IEC DIS 29500 standard
> >
> > 2007-09-04
> >
> > A ballot on whether to publish the draft standard ISO/IEC DIS 29500,
> > Information technology - Office Open XML file formats, as an
> > International Standard by ISO (International Organization for
> > Standardization) and IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission)
> > has not achieved the required number of votes for approval.
> >
> > The five-month ballot process ended on 2 September and was open to the
> > IEC and ISO national member bodies from 104 countries, including 41
> > that are participating members of the joint ISO/IEC technical
> > committee, JTC 1, Information technology.
> >
> > Approval requires at least 2/3 (i.e. 66.66 %) of the votes cast by
> > national bodies participating in ISO/IEC JTC 1 to be positive; and no
> > more than 1/4 (i.e. 25 %) of the total number of national body votes
> > cast negative. Neither of these criteria were achieved, with 53 % of
> > votes cast by national bodies participating in ISO/IEC JTC 1 being
> > positive and 26 % of national votes cast being negative.
> >
> > Comments that accompanied the votes will be discussed at a ballot
> > resolution meeting (BRM) to be organized by the relevant subcommittee
> > of ISO/IEC JTC 1 (SC 34, Document description and processing
> > languages) in February 2008 in Geneva, Switzerland.
> >
> > The objective of the meeting will be to review and seek consensus on
> > possible modifications to the document in light of the comments
> > received along with the votes. If the proposed modifications are such
> > that national bodies then wish to withdraw their negative votes, and
> > the above acceptance criteria are then met, the standard may proceed
> > to publication.
> >
> > Otherwise, the proposal will have failed and this fast-track procedure
> > will be terminated. This would not preclude subsequent re-submission
> > under the normal ISO/IEC standards development rules.
> >
> > ISO/IEC DIS 29500 is a proposed standard for word-processing
> > documents, presentations and spreadsheets that is intended to be
> > implemented by multiple applications on multiple platforms. According
> > to the submitters, one of its objectives is to ensure the long-term
> > preservation of documents created over the last two decades using
> > programmes that are becoming incompatible with continuing advances in
> > the IT field.
> >
> > ISO/IEC DIS 29500 was originally developed as the Office Open XML
> > Specification by Microsoft Corporation which submitted it to Ecma
> > International for transposing into an ECMA standard. Following a
> > process in which other IT industry players participated, Ecma
> > International subsequently published the document as ECMA standard
> > 376.
> >
> > Ecma International then submitted the standard in December 2006 to
> > ISO/IEC JTC 1, with whom it has category A liaison status, for
> > adoption as an International Standard under the JTC 1 "fast track"
> > procedure. This allows a standard developed within the IT industry to
> > be presented to JTC 1 as a Draft International Standard (DIS) that can
> > be adopted after a process consisting of a one-month review by the
> > national bodies of JTC 1 and then a five-month ballot open to all
> > voting national bodies of ISO and IEC.
> >
> > About ISO
> > ISO is a global network of national standards institutes from 157
> > countries. It has a current portfolio of more than 16 500 standards
> > for business, government and society. ISO's standards make up a
> > complete offering for all three dimensions of sustainable development
> > - economic, environmental and social. ISO standards provide
> > solutions and achieve benefits for almost all sectors of activity,
> > including agriculture, construction, mechanical engineering,
> > manufacturing, distribution, transport, medical devices, information
> > and communication technologies, the environment, energy, quality
> > management, conformity assessment and services.
> >
> > About IEC
> > The IEC, headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, is the world´s
> > leading organization that prepares and publishes International
> > Standards for all electrical, electronic and related technologies -
> > collectively known as "electrotechnology". IEC standards cover a
> > vast range of technologies from power generation, transmission and
> > distribution to home appliances and office equipment, semiconductors,
> > fibre optics, batteries, flat panel displays and solar energy, to
> > mention just a few. Wherever you find electricity and electronics, you
> > find the IEC supporting safety and performance, the environment,
> > electrical energy efficiency and renewable energies. The IEC also
> > manages conformity assessment schemes that certify whether equipment,
> > systems or components conform to its International Standards.
> > _______________________________________________ incom-l mailing list
> > incom-l at incommunicado.info
> > http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/incom-l
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Anriette Esterhuysen, Executive Director
> Association for Progressive Communications
> anriette at apc.org
> http://www.apc.org
> PO Box 29755, Melville, South Africa. 2109
> Tel. 27 11 726 1692
> Fax 27 11 726 1692
>
> _______________________________________________
> incom-l mailing list
> incom-l at incommunicado.info
> http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/incom-l
>


-- 
FelipeFonseca

http://efeefe.no-ip.org - Blogue
http://bricolabs.net - BricoLabs, né?
http://metareciclagem.org - Nova versao!