The OpenOffice.org project has just released the first « public » beta version of OpenOffice.org 3.0.This first beta version may not support all the expected features that will be included in the stable version but it does give a very good feeling of how the 3.0 will be like. You will find a more detailed list of features on this page. As you can see the 3.0 will sport a number of very interesting and useful features, such as the ability to import PDF documents, switching language inside one document, a new StartCenter, new icons, etc.I wanted to go a bit beyond the list of new features and tell you about the effect that OpenOffice.org 3.0 will have on its users and ultimately on the way we create content share it and stay happily productive in this always-on world.

Perhaps what matters the most with OpenOffice.org 3.0 will not so much be the flurry of new features; perhaps what will ultimately matter is the brand new architecture of OpenOffice.org that has been introduced with this new release. You already knew about the ability to use extensions in order to add features to OpenOffice.org. With the 3.0, OpenOffice.org becomes even more modular, allowing even more interested people to develop their own features on top of the 3.0 platform.In the long run, this completely revisited, rearchitected platform will play an essential part in extending the yield of OpenOffice.org .

The concept of office suite has kept evolving ever since its appearance in the eighties. At first, what mattered was the wordprocessor and the spreadsheet application. Then, Powerpoint came in and started to control our minds, becoming both a tool and a concept. We then learned about the concept of productivity suite, growing the office suite with all kinds of tools, from a PIM module to specific financial applications and elementary document management features.

Today, the paradigm has changed, but it does not necessarily involve the fattening of the whole suite. Rather, I believe that this new paradigm is about creating all sorts of content and sharing it freely. Sharing freely involves two perequisites: The easyness of sharing and the use of open formats, open standards that allow the users to master their own data and content and does not push them into vendor lock-in. This assumption also implies another, subtle point: the boundaries between applications are blurring and the applications themselves become easier to use.What this means leaves some room for interpretation and unveils new, different paths. Let’s see first what these new paths will not be, and second, let’s see what options there are and what are the options Openoffice.org chose.

The new paradigm in office suite rests on the following elements:

• Creation of open content through the use of open and free formats, ideally standards
• Freedom to share and distribute this content
• Ease of use, simplicity

These three elements ultimately make up for an interesting consequence; they don’t just liberate the content and the creativity of users, they also lower significantly the barriers of adoption for people who could never afford this before. In doing so, this paradigm puts forth the urge to enable participation. Ultimately, that’s what office suites should be nowadays: Participation Enablers.

One can understand now why I think MS Office 2007-2008 has already missed this shift of paradigm: The use of proprietary formats and spreading confusion around the concept of openness will not really help in the end. Yet, the latest versions of MS Office suffer from their excessive integration with MS SharePoint, the mother of all office technologies by Microsoft. This CMS/Groupware platform may be very easy to use, but it does create a fortress of formats and DRMs beyond which users are forbidden to go, and share. This centralized process is also very telling of a deprecated mentatlity even before being a compelling offer for certain types of organizations.

The truth here, tools such as SharePoints will fade away, as wikis take the lead. And precisely, OpenOffice.org allows you to export your content in certain wiki syntaxes while choosing directly the server that needs to be accessed. So much for command and control…But lets go back to our topic.

The appearance of online office suites such as Google Docs and Zoho shows a new path and illustrates the shift of paradigm in office suites. Online office suites make it easier to create and share content while making the issues of platforms and applications fall thanks to their online nature. The ability to import and export from and to multiple formats, some of whose being open standards (ODF, PDF) is also present. At the same time, online services such as Slideshare add value to traditional tools.

Nobody wants to have to deal with proprietary barriers of any kind. It is about creating and sharing freely, and ultimately, it is about enabling participation.OpenOffice.org is not an online office suite. But by enabling people to share and to communicate, OpenOffice.org works like a hub for content creation. Its features set covers the full range of functionalities expected by advanced users, and its inherently free nature (in beer and in speech) allows anybody to use it in order to create and share in the easiest way possible.Its extendability not only creates an ecosystem, it creates something more powerful: A community of users contributing to OpenOffice.org in order to serve their needs, and ultimately enriching the codebase.The modularity of OpenOffice.org (turning it into a set of modules running on top of a runtime environment, the URE) also make it possible to turn the overall platform into a RIA (Rich Internet Application) , thus addressing even more use cases.

In any case, OpenOffice.org is on its way to become the hub of your digital content, by enabling freedom; freedom to use, freedom to share, freedome to modify, and freedom to distribute.

Share This

But there is nothing, neither on the ISO web site, nor on the JTC1’s, while the Ecma and the Microsoft web site habor nothing else than their other usual news on other topics.

Rob Weir is wondering who may be induly favoured by this situation; I am but desesperately resigned to see this kind of irregularities happen. Unfortunately it strikes me as obvious that whatever irregular actions might be accomplished further in the OOXML case, the ISO will not be doing anything. It will carry on the farce, no matter what it takes, and will serve the Ecma (and the Ecma’s main shareholder’s interests) even if that means jumping in the pond of Ridicule.

Today it occured to me that we were getting closer to the twentieth anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. A defining moment of History always comes with its flurry of anecdotes, quotes, and images, especially when we are close to it. And twenty years is very close on historical timelines. This is how the following sentence popped back in my mind: « Die Partei hat immer Recht »; it means « the Party is always right » with a very subtle nuance that I believe of some importance: The emphasis lies not on the righteousness of the said party (the SED, East-German Communist Party) or the mere affirmation that it always speaks the truth, but it lies in the subtle, deeper sense that the Party owns the right, or defines the law by which it owns the right to judge what is right and what is wrong. If that notion had not been consciously or unconsciously implied in this slogan, then the German sentence would have merely been « Die Partei ist immer richtig », the exact translation in English being « the Party is always right ». The original terms though convey the nuance I describe above through the use of the verb «to have/haben » and the subsequent use of the common noun « Das Recht » (the right, as in human rights), understood in a quasi-legal sense.

Now if you care to ask me, what in blazes does this linguistic considerations have to do with OOXML? The repeated and successful attempts by Microsoft to influence the outcome of the OOXML standardization process at the levels of the ISO’s JTC1 and of the national standards body was in itself unseen and the evidence that some large corporations are ready to do whatever it takes to fulfill their strategic objectives. Yet, the incongruous, unexpected behaviour of the standardization world has given way to a near total impunity for the Ecma and Microsoft. No matter how twisted a situation can be, the JTC1’s SC34 should always be followed, and when the rules do not fit the Ecma, then the rules are ignored or simply changed. At this stage, we do not know the reasons for which OOXML has not yet been published. I’m not even requesting the very final, ISO -stamped version of OOXML, but just the final, post BRM, consolidated version of OOXML. That too does not seem to exist. But worry not, some reasons will be made up, almost on the fly, cunningly lame and incredibly mediocre explanations that will show the utter submission to powerful interests of some inside the SC34 and the complete brainwashing of others.

In a few words like in a thousands, « Die Partei hat immer Recht ».

NB to the people working for Microsoft or for an entity having ties with Microsoft: I do not imply that Microsoft is like the East-German « United Workers’ Party » or that Microsoft is communist in any way (but Steve Ballmer implied that Free Software movement is communism, if you care to remember). Therefore I do not want to hear any threats or requests for public apologies for this blog. I meant what I meant, and said what I had to say. Don’t look for meanings that are not there. This is my mere, personal opinion and I am blessed to live in a country that is a democracy where Free Speech (just like Free Software) is protected and allowed. I am sure you too can appreciate that as well.

Share This

At the time this post is being written, there is still no news of the final version of Ecma 376/DIS-ISO 29500, aka OOXML. I guess we’ll have to wait until midnight, today, Geneva time to have it. Yet some also claim that the deadline was midnight yesterday on the First of April. The situation being what it is, I have decided to write a small song, and not to sing it because I sing very poorly. It will be up to Pieter (and its incredible guitar) to record it. The words below are to be singed on the music of the Doors, « Waiting for the Sun ».

At last comes the moment when truth shall come out

Standing on the brink of outrage

Waiting for OOXML (3x)

Can’t you still read it now that the Spring has come.

And its time to push it to unwanting users.

Waiting for OOXML (3x)

Waiting…. waiting…. waiting…. waiting…. (2x)

Waiting for it to – be published

Waiting for it to -really work

Waiting for it to – locking you all

Waiting for you to - tell me what went wrong

This is the worst standard I’ve ever known.

Yeah! (riff 8x)

Enjoy your week-end!

Share This

Today I will talk about some tools I’m using daily, namely feedreaders. It is likely that at least a good half of the people with whom I’m working use these readers in order to browse among dozens, if not hundreds of feeds. For the readers of this blog who don’t use such tools, here’s a quick description of the benefits they bring. I know they are not immediately obvious to the people who do not regularly use feedreaders. In a few words, you can fetch in one interface the content of the websites you’re visiting on a daily or weekly basis and read this always updated content (through RSS or Atom feeds provided by those web sites). Now how this is supposed to work better than the « old way » of browsing pages on the web? To be fair, it is only useful if you’re like me and many others, browsing hundreds of articles and dozens of website throughout the day while working on something else. Otherwise, feedreaders’s advantage will have little value in comparison of your good old bookmarks.

The section on fundamentals will stop here. What I would like to talk about now is not the feedreaders themselves, but the online feedreaders. Although I happen to use feedreaders myself, (on my Mac, I occasionaly use Vienna, a BSD feedreader for Mac with multiple themes and a clean , yet elegant interface) I mostly use online feedreaders. Why?

Mostly because I don’t have to open yet another software regardless of how small its footprint would be and I can find it directly in my browser window. Another benefit is that I’m free to browse my feeds on other computers, although desktop feedreaders are obviously better in an offline mode (See my point on Google Gears further below). As it turns out, I am now using three on line feedreaders. If you care to ask why in the world I would use three of those, my answer will be simple: 1) because I’m weird 2) because I still can’t decide the best among those three. So here’s what I’ll do now: I shall discuss the merits and drawbacks of those three services below and ask interested readers to provide me here with their opinion and feedback on this matter.

Blorq : Blorq has been my first online feedreader I’ve been using. I happen to talk once in a while with its founder. I believe Blorq is the cleanest and simplest reader I’ve ever seen, but several issues bother me. First, it only works with Firefox (all versions) but not with other browsers such as Safari, Shiira, and Omniweb (I don’t remember if it works with Opera though). Second, Blorq is at this stage very much a project on hold. I’d love it to become sustainable though. On the up side, it is quite clean and fast, and it does one thing right (feedreading and aggregation) and while social features are present (through the use of « Sets ») it does not bug you with anything that is not feedreading.

Rojo : Probably one of the oldest online feedreader/aggregator, it sports the most beautiful interface (different shades of blue and red on a white background), at least according to my taste. It is very simple to use, puts more emphasis on social features through the division of one’s personal pages and tags and the aggregation of every pages making up for the Rojo publicly available aggregated content. It also works with every browser I have used so far. But there is a big minus: Quality. The service can sometimes be slow, or simply break and it does so often.

Google Reader : I have been wary and very critical of one of the most famous online feedreader for a long time. At first I thought the service was slow, its interface simple but not elegant and generally speaking behaving poorly. Also, I found Google Gears to be more of nuisance than anything.

However, all this changed almost imperceptibly in less than 6-8 months. Although I still find the interface to be too simple for my own aesthetic tastes, the performance of the service is now much better than both Rojo and Blorq. In short, Google Reader is fast. The configuration is also very easy, features are added almost every day and I have not explored all the shortcuts available. The feeds suggestion is also very good (probably even better than with Rojo) but given the fact that I am using mostly Firefox 3.0 beta versions I was not able to use Gears with the service in order to test its offline capabilities.

So to summarize things bluntly: Blorq goes for simplicity and purity, Rojo for Beauty, and Google Reader for performance. You choose. I can’t.

Last but not least, I didn’t want to end up this post without pointing to some useful RSS/OPML tools:

• Xfruits : is a set of services churning RSS feeds, web content and OPML files (xml files storing a group of rss feeds listing) in and out websites, emails, blogposts, and even mobile. In fact, it could also be used as an RSS reader but you have to enter rss feeds manually instead of being able to import full OPML files as it’s the case with Blorq, Google Reader and Rojo. It’s a nice and useful service that does many things (although I believe their creation of OPML has a few glitches) made by a nice French company from Corsica.

• Feedblendr: another online set of tools around RSS. You can do less things with Feedblendr than with Xfruits, but it might be very helpful and is simple enough to use by everybody.

Comments welcome!

Share This

So what is going on , and what is left to be done before OOXML gets its now more than ever dubious ISO stamp? First, it is important to understand that we still have to see and to read the final draft of OOXML.

The deadline for the Ecma to publish this final version is on the 2 ^nd of May. There should be no doubt about wether this document will be produced in time. Of course, wondering about its quality will be another matter and a legitimate one at that. Where it becomes interesting is that as far as I was able to gather, the process does not stop at that stage. Once we will have that document (once again, it is dubbed « final draft) we will have a period of time to review it and if necessary, to appeal to it if the quality of the document is not satisfactory.

Before anybody from Microsoft starts to call me disingenuous, let me just get this straight: Despite what I may think of the whole OOXML standardization process, despite how critical I am of the existing ISO processes, I have no problem with the simple reality of what we went through because of OOXML. To be very factual, OOXML has received the appropriate number of votes in order to become an ISO standard. What remains to be done might sound incredible: OOXML has to be published first, then definitely approved. I am pretty sure that it will very likely become an ISO standard, but that’s ultimately up to the ISO, after the document’s publication and the necessary review period that will stamp it as an ISO standard (or not).

I wanted to point that out because I increasingly get the feeling that some want us to forget this process and to switch to some other topic (XPS for instance?). I know that there are more interesting topics to work on; after all, ODF 1.2 is not that far out in distance, and I expect all the love and kisses to be sent by our friends in Redmond. But I am still sticking to it not clinging, but sticking, not because of a perverse and pathetic hope I would appear to have against OOXML, but because I believe that the bells and whistles have been taken out a bit too fast.

We want the spec. We want it as bad as we wanted the answers from the Ecma in December, as bad as we want the whole OOXML and as bad as we want to have the specification of the format called OOXML and actually used inside MS Office 2007. Groklaw has an interesting article about it, but allow me to disagree with Groklaw for this time: This is hardly a scoop, just read my blog, Rob Weir’s, GullFOSS or Stephane Rodriguez. It was a known fact for several months now. Okay, I hear you say, it never hurts to trumpet out the truth. What this implies is that Microsoft will not only have to harmonize its several specifications, it may want to do something with the format used by MS Office 2007, 2008, and soon 2009.

Unless of course, Microsoft remains idle and does anything with MS Office 2007. After all, there is no legal nor moral requirement to use an ISO standard; but you can still claim you use one in front of your customers. I’m sure it already happened in Bercy….

Share This

Share This

“Friends, Bloggers, Free Coders, Supporters of Open Standards!
We are not here today in order to bash Microsoft.

We are here because we believe in open standards.

We are not even here today because we are opposed to OOXML.

We are here because we are opposed to OOXML as an ISO standard.

We are not here because we want to discredit the ISO.
We are here because we want to defend ISO’s integrity.

We are here because we want to draw attention to the scandalous behaviour of the people in Standard Norway whose job it is to represent Norwegian users and software vendors.

And we are here because we want to prevent the adoption of a damaging IT standard in Norway.

I will get back to this shortly. First I want to spend a few minutes explaining some background for the benefit of people who don’t understand what this issue is all about. Please bear with me.

This issue is all about documents - digital documents.

It’s about how we store documents and how we interchange documents with one another. I’m talking about the kind of documents many of you create every day: reports, letters, articles, school essays, books, theses, spreadsheets, and the like, using programs like Microsoft Word and Excel.

But let us forget documents for a moment and talk instead about hair dryers.

Let me show you an ordinary hair dryer, bought in a shop here in Norway. It has a plug. The plug has two pins. I can plug this hair dryer into any electricity socket anywhere in Norway.

The reason I can do this is because all sockets are the same. There is a standard for sockets in Norway.

The same standard is used in large parts of Europe and elsewhere: If I go to Denmark, I can take this hair dryer, plug it in, and it just works.

I can do the same in Finland, Sweden, Germany and many other countries. I just plug it in and it works.

But if I go to England, I can’t just plug it in, because the sockets there are different. They have 3 square pins instead of 2 rounds ones.

If I go to the US or Japan, I can’t just plug it in, because their sockets are different again. They have 2 flat pins instead of 2 round ones.

Documents are like hair dryers. We want to be able to plug them in to any piece of software and be able to work with them. But that’s not how it is today. If you create a document in Microsoft Word and send it to someone else, that person cannot use it unless they also have Microsoft Word.

I believe that is wrong.

People should not have to pay money to Microsoft in order to read my documents. The way things are at the moment, Microsoft effectively has control of the documents you and I create.

That’s not how it should be.

Open standards can solve this problem, and that is why I believe in them. That is why I have spent the last 13 years representing Norway as a volunteer in a committee for international standards. I have worked with many standards, including SGML, XML and Topic Maps, and I have been Chairman of the Norwegian ISO committee since 1995.

Two years ago, my committee approved an open standard for office documents called ODF. ODF was developed through an open and democratic process in an organization called OASIS.

The purpose of ODF was to provide an alternative to what we call “proprietary” formats. Instead of document formats that are owned and controlled by a single vendor and that force you to use a particular piece of software, the ODF people wanted to define an open format that would make it possible to plug your documents into any piece of software.

ODF was developed, as I said, through an open and democratic process. But one important player was absent from that process. The vendor who dominates this market, Microsoft, refused to participate, and they have refused to support ODF since it became a standard.

Instead they decided to create a competing standard called OOXML and to use Ecma as a back door into ISO.

That is why we are here today.

We are not against OOXML itself. In fact, we thank Microsoft for finally after twenty years of market dominance documenting its format in an open specification.

However, we are against ISO’s approval of OOXML. The reason for this is simple: It is not in the interests of users like you and me to have two standards for the same purpose. It would be as if Microsoft were to come here and start installing sockets with 3 pins rather than 2, and then force us to buy their hair dryers.

We are not against ISO either. What we are against is the way in which what has always been an open and democratic organization, where each country has one vote, has been subverted by a large multinational corporation.

I do not hate Microsoft. I would like to welcome Microsoft into the standards community, but only if Microsoft abides by the rules and in particular the spirit of the standardization process.

Microsoft has a bad reputation in the standards community. They are the Big Bad Wolf of standards, just like IBM was 20 years ago. But IBM has shown that it is possible to change.

I hope that Microsoft too will change. I think it is possible. But it will only happen if we, the users, force them to change.

Microsoft needs our help. We have to tell them to stop behaving like a bull in a china shop. They have to help them understand that standards work is about co-operation, not about conflict. Standards should not be created through warfare. They should be created through collaboration.

Microsoft has a lot to learn, and it will take time. It will also take time for Microsoft to earn the trust of all those whose work they have sabotaged during the last twenty years.

Microsoft now says that it now believes in open standards. They need to understand that it will take time before everyone really trusts them. They have to start showing less arrogance and more humility, and they have to prove in practice that they mean what they say.

They can take the first step by admitting that they were wrong not to support ODF.

I call on Microsoft to admit its mistake in trying to force OOXML through ISO’s fast track procedure, and I call on them to support ODF.

I call on Ecma to withdraw OOXML from ISO and keep control of it themselves. We need it for legacy documents.

I call on Standard Norway to admit that it was wrong to overrule its own committee of experts and on them to change Norway’s vote from Yes to No.

I call on the Norwegian Government to stand firm against Microsoft and not to approve OOXML as a Norwegian standard.

Finally I call on users all around the world to look to Norway and follow the example we have set. Raise a storm of protest! Uncover the irregularities that have taken place in your country! Insist that your Governments change their vote to reflect the interests of ordinary people and not the interests of monopolists and bureaucrats.

Kjære nordmenn, vi er ikke alene. Dear Norwegians, we are not alone.

Countries representing the majority of the world’s population voted No to OOXML and for good reason.

Let me quote just one example. This is from a speech given by the South African Minister for Public Service and Administration, Ms. Geraldine J Fraser-Moleketi. She was speaking at a Conference on the Digital Commons and Open Source Software in Dakar, Senegal just three weeks ago. Here is what she said:

“The adoption of open standards by governments is a critical factor in building interoperable information systems which are open, accessible, fair, and which reinforce democratic culture and good governance practices”

ODF is an open standard developed by a technical committee within the OASIS consortium South Africa is amongst a growing number of National Governments who have adopted ODF over the past year.

It is unfortunate that the leading vendor of office software, which enjoys considerable dominance in the market, chose not to participate and support ODF in its products, but rather to develop its own competing document standard…

If it is successful, it is difficult to see how consumers will benefit from these two overlapping ISO standards. I would like to appeal to vendors to listen to the demands of consumers as well as Free Software developers. Please work together to produce interoperable document standards. The proliferation of multiple standards in this space is confusing and costly.

Ms. Fraser-Moleketi: The people of Norway are with you, and we beg your forgiveness for the unacceptable behaviour of our standards bureaucracy.

We were robbed of victory in ISO by a mere 3 votes.

Without the irregularities in Norway, that would have been just 2 votes. Reports are coming in of similar irregularities in other countries, including France and Denmark. Let’s get those non-representative votes changed. Let’s throw OOXML out of ISO.

Microsoft thinks it has won this battle, but I say it’s not over yet.

It’s never over until the fat lady sings, and this fat lady only just got started. ”

Share This

 First, Microsoft will try to kill ODF. They can try to do this at two levels: at the level of the OASIS ODF TC, and at the level of the next iteration of ODF, ODF 1.2 (due sometimes this Fall and later to be brought on to the ISO). You can rest assured that Microsoft will exert pressures on the OASIS ODF committees either by attempting to stuff it, or by pressuring players such as Novell, Patrick Durusau, or even Sun Microsystems. One of them is a puppet of Microsoft, bound by heavy investment of Microsoft disguised as a legal and business partnership agreement (Novell), another one made an odd trip not that far from Redmond and came back with a completely new view on OOXML and ODF (P. Durusau), while another one has a strong legal settlement with Microsoft and may not afford to lose it for obvious business reasons (Sun).

 Another way for Microsoft to attack ODF would be to oppose the standardization of ODF 1.2. They will use the same tactics they had with OOXML, but in the opposite direction. It will be funny to watch how the ISO and the national standards bodies will switch all of a sudden to a demanding stance on ODF 1.2, which will only be an iteration of an existing ISO standard. I am afraid we will witness such a shocking twist in the standardization bodies’ attitude. Romania, for instance, might completely change its happy-go-merry stance it had on OOXML (Approve without comments, twice) to an eagle-eye, unforgiving and watchdoggish scowl of ODF (Disapprove with… interesting comments). Heck, they might even use their former “laxist” attitude they had with OOXML as an excuse to block ODF, those masters of cynicism.

 But all this is just one wing of  the pincer movement I am describing here. The other part of the strategy was however clear ever since the beginning. OOXML is the first chapter into an attempt by Microsoft to shove its own technologies to the ISO. Next in line will be XPS. If you don’t know what XPS is, check it out from the source. Yes, you got that right. PDF reloaded. Now with more patents, OOXML dependencies, and legal traps. What’s the advantage you ask? None. But the respectable industry players we saw in every national standards body (understand: Microsoft’s partners) will insist that it will offer them clarity and a potential new source of revenue. This time though Microsoft got really clever: They went where Adobe had forgotten to go for ages, to the printing industry. This time we will see HP really coming out with flowers for Redmond. In France , HP never joined the works of our committee but they got really supporting of OOXML all of a sudden, around Friday night and after somebody  (obviously being married to a woman of Italian descent with a nice hat, blue eyes, brown hair, ) had been given instructions to play nice with Microsoft. What you say, “is the French government bending to the will of Microsoft? Is it weaker than corporations?” Depends whom you ask, who you can contact, and who you supported. Enough said. Back to XPS.

Well XPS is, believe or not, a standard in the making. And since it is being “developed” (ah, the game of mirrors, illusions and appearances) by the Ecma, it will be pushed through the very same Fast-Track process the Ecma has been lavishly endowed to use with OOXML.

 Would you believe me if I wrote that I knew what’s in store after XPS? Let’s bet I know it. After OOXML shall come XPS. And once Microsoft will have locked the whole industry with its document formats, they will try to do the same with multimedia formats. Expect the future Windows Media formats, their proprietary video codecs to follow the same path. Their glue shall be Silverlight, which in turn rests on Windows Presentation Foundation and the .NET framework. The license shall be the famous OSP, effectively barring GPL implementations and leaving many other issues, such as the RAND mode applied on the covered technologies, in the shadows, but always as a critical factor to consider. Novell will follow, as usual, with incomplete and patent-riddled implementations that you will only be able to safely use with Novell products. 

And then? Then,  as Shakespeare once magnificently wrote, then there shall be silence. At last, silence to win, silence to dominate, silence to influence, silence to pressure, and silence to silence them all.   

Share This

It is always easy to claim you could not do this or that because the other guy was better, or that you ran out of luck. But this time, clear evidence has shown that not only any meaningful standardization work was simply impossible, but any attempt to restore sanity or coherence in the process was matched with unequaled pressure by Microsoft.

If you thought you had seen everything about OOXML with the likes of Rick Jelliffe, committees that have been stuffed by Microsoft and its minions to the point where no other choice than approval would be possible, think again. And do open your eyes to one of the greatest scams of computing history. Below are a few examples of what I’m talking about today. But they are meaningful enough.

Germany

In a steering committee of 20 people a vote was taken to answer this question:

“did the process run according to the rules and without irregularities?” 6 answered no and 7 abstained!

http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-49525/limited-choice-at-german-din

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2008032913190768

Norway

21 members of the committee voted NO to fast-track this DIS but it was decided to vote yes anyway:

http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-50031/oil-fire-in-norway-microsoft-buys-another-standards-body

Denmark

The technical committee didn’t agree to change the disapproval vote but it was “decided” to vote yes anyway. The committee S-142/U-34 under Danish Standards could not agree to change their vote from No to Yes.

A couple of hours later:

http://www.version2.dk/artikel/6718 says that the announcement from Danish Standards will not be made until Friday and that the Chair of the committee has been barred from speaking about the result of yesterday’s meeting.

After some Microsoft political intervention to revert this ( the Prime Minister of Denmark is a Microsoft friend ), we have this:

http://www.en.ds.dk/4227

Another political decision, influenced by Microsoft lobbyists.

Malaysia

The Minister of Science, Technology and Innovation decided on Malaysia’s final position on OOXML (”abstain” ), overturning the 81% ”Disapprove” position by ISC-G and TC4.

http://www.openmalaysiablog.com/2008/03/the-minister-of.html

Poland

On March 20, 2008, Technical Committee (KT 182) of PKN was supposed to either accept the recommendation (which was to vote YES for the proposed standard) or not accept it, and thus recommend PKN to vote NO or abstain from voting. Of 45 members, 24 appeared on the meeting. And the votes looked like this:

   * 12 votes supporting the recommandation,

   * 10 votes rejecting it,

   * 2 abstaining to vote.

No consensus has been achieved concerning the recommendation. Thus, the chairman of KT 182, Elzbieta Andrukiewicz, decided to allow the missing members to vote by e-mail during the next 10 days (till the end of March).

The email vote was taken, counting a “no mail sended” as an “approval” !!! Clearly, there was no technical consensus in Poland, but the chairman forced the rules to favour an approval.

http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-49455/polish-chairwoman-distributes-microsoft-propaganda

http://polishlinux.org/poland/possible-manipulation-around-ooxml-process-in-poland/

http://polishlinux.org/poland/poland-confirms-its-approval-for-ooxml-in-iso/

Croatia

Out of 35 members of TO Z1, 17 sent a vote, and there were three votes for, and fourteen against fast-tracking OOXML, which is relative rejection rate of 82%. Members who voted were individual experts, IBM, CLUG and HrOpen. However, since there were less than 51% of votes, the voting process was declared invalid, and the previous vote holds (”approve” ) !

Microsoft Croatia heavily influenced the voting, arguing that there’s no need for a second round and accusing commitee conveners of incompetence.

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2008032913190768

http://www.oddparity.org/index2.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=44&pop=1&page=0&Itemid=1

USA

The technical committee Incits/V1 was heavily stacked by Microsoft partners.

http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-46044/committee-stuffing-also-in-the-united-states:11-microsoft-business-partners

Switzerland

The chairman Hans-Rudolf Thomann systematically blocked the technical opposition to the DIS, virtually deciding Switzerland position himself.

New infamous JTC 1 P-members:

Accepted a few days before DIS 29500 ballot closing, who joined ISO

JTC1 just to cast a “yes vote”:

Jamaica island

Cyprus island

Malta island

Kazakhstan

Lebanon

Azerbaijan

Cote-d’Ivore

Pakistan

http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-43510/ivory-coast-represented-by-microsoft-senegal-at-the-brm

I do not think that the victory of Microsoft will hinder ODF anymore; because I think that the approval of OOXML as an ISO standard has been gained through pressure, tricks, and countless irregularities. And this will be heard by the whole world. Congratulations, Microsoft. You have cured the deafness of many today.  

Share This

In a world where records are increasingly kept in electronic form,
Open Standards are crucial for valuable information to outlive the
application in which it was initially generated. The question of
Document Freedom has severe repercussions for freedom of choice,
competition, markets and the sovereignty of countries and their
governments.

“We are very happy about the response and activities that teams around
the world have scheduled,” says Ivan Jelic, DFD Coordinator. “Activities
we have heard about range from local speeches and information events
through to prizes being given to governmental bodies that adopted good
policies in the field of Document Freedom and Open Standards. It will
be a challenge to document everything that is taking place today.”

The DFD team will do its best to gather all the media reports,
pictures and stories around this first DFD and collect them on the DFD
web page for reference and future editions of the event. If you have
material about local document liberation activities, please send mail to:

coordination@documentfreedom.org

How you can get active

The Document Freedom Day is a collaborative effort.

You can make a difference by linking to http://documentfreedom.org,
generate your own artworks or use the ones available at

http://documentfreedom.org/Artwork or generate your own.

You could also print out some of the DFD leaflets at

http://www.documentfreedom.org/2008/DFD_Starter_Pack#Leaflet

and give them to your co-workers, family or friends. And if you feel
creative, consider taking pictures or small video testimonials that
show the world what Document Freedom means to you!

About the Document Freedom Day

The Document Freedom Day (DFD) is a global day for Document
Liberation with roughly 200 active teams worldwide. It is a day of
grassroots effort around the world to promote and build awareness for
the relevance of Free Document Formats in particular and Open
Standards in general.

Document Freedom Day is supported by a large group of organisations
and individuals, including, but not limited to Ars Aperta, COSS,
Esoma, Free Software Foundations Europe and Latin America, IBM,
NLnet, ODF Alliance, OpenForum Europe, OSL, iMatix, Red Hat, Sun
Microsystems, Inc., The Open Learning Centre, Opentia, Estandares
Abiertos.

The list of DFD supporting groups can be found
http://documentfreedom.org/Who

The list of DFD Teams is available at
http://documentfreedom.org/Category:Teams

(Local contact for France: Ars Aperta / contact at arsaperta dot com)

Share This