DIS 29500/OOXML - What you can do

Inigo Surguy

I was at the OOXML BRM in Geneva on behalf of my national body. We were trying to improve the Ecma 376 OOXML specification (i.e. what many people think of as the spec for the Microsoft Office 2007 file formats), in preparation for national bodies to make the final decision as to whether it should be accepted by ISO as a standard. I'm not going to blog about the details of it, because that's already been done well by plenty of people already (Antonis Christofides, Tim Bray, Jesper Lund Stocholm, Rob Weir, Yong Yoon Kit, Doug Mahugh, Brian Jones).

What I don't think has been covered well is what happens now, and what people can do about it.

What happens next

Now, the various national bodies receive reports from their delegations, and make a decision on whether to keep their previous vote, or to amend it. Some countries will have already made that decision, some won't. In some countries, such as the US and the UK, a technical committee will produce a recommendation, and another committee will take the final decision, taking the technical recommendation into account.

What you can do about it

Realistically, blogging about it will do very little to affect the votes. That's not to say that it's not worthwhile blogging about the issues - it is. But not many NB committee members read blogs, and those that do are unlikely to be convinced by most of the arguments on blogs.

If you have strong feelings about the procedures used in the voting (e.g. the O members vs P members debate, or the voting on issues that were not individually discussed):

I suspect that most national bodies will prefer communication via email - it's easier for the NB to distribute it to any relevant committee members. But some people feel that emails are cheap and easy, and sending a letter on paper carries more weight: if you agree, then just be aware that there isn't very much time before the decision on voting is due.

If you think that there are technical problems in the specification:

Good examples are Groklaw's post on the use of MP3 with OOXML (Groklaw is wrong, as I explain in the comments, but Groklaw are doing the right thing), or Rob Weir's post on OOXML macros (which I think makes a good argument).

If you think that there are other problems (e.g. IP issues, unsuitability for a fast-track process, contradiction with ISO 26300, size of the specification, etc.):

If you want to express your enthusiasm for the specification:

I look forward to receiving high-quality arguments via my national body!

Update: the No-OOXML site has a list of national bodies and their contact details. I don't know whether this list is complete and correct, but it looks plausible.

I've written about OOXML before when I reviewed the examples in the draft spec and found many problems with them. This was adopted by the No-OOXML campaign as item 4 on their petition.

Disclaimer: I am posting this as myself, Inigo Surguy, rather than as a BRM delegate, a representative of my country, or as an employee of my company 67 Bricks Ltd.


Discuss the OOXML BRM.

Return to index

Return to the index page.