Microsoft wasting no time rejoicing in its OOXML win

Summary: Like it or not, Microsoft’s OOXML – now known as IS 29500 -- has received the proper number of votes to become an ISO standard.And the Redmond, Washington company is wasting no time rejoicing the turnaround win.

Like it or not, Microsoft’s OOXML – now known as IS 29500 -- has received the proper number of votes to become an ISO standard.

And the Redmond, Washington company is wasting no time rejoicing the turnaround win.

In his blog today, Jason Matusow, a key Microsoft executive responsible for OOXML, pre-announced that ISO will publish a statement stating that DIS 29500 has become IS 29500 and that Microsoft is committing to implementing IS 29500 in its next version of Microsoft Office.

Microsoft corporate also issued an official statement about Office Open XML “appearing” to win approval as an ISO standard. OOXML lost in the first voting round last September.

“After more than 14 months of intensive review, a Joint Technical Committee of the International Standardization Organization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) has concluded its formal process to evaluate Ecma International’s submission of the Draft International Standard (DIS) 29500: Office Open XML (Open XML),” the statement said.

“While the final vote has not yet been announced formally, publicly available information appears to indicate the proposed Open XML standard received extremely broad support," Microsoft announced.

Microsoft, citing documents available on the Internet, said that 86 percent of all voting national body members support OOXML’s ISO/IEC standardization (above the 75 percent requirements) and that the participating national body members support standardization, also well above the 66.7 percent requirement for this group,” the Microsoft statement said. “Open XML now joins HTML, PDF and ODF as ISO- and IEC-recognized open document format standards.”

Microsoft noted that many ISVs and platform vendors including Apple, Corel, Sun, Novell have developed solutions that use Office Open XML and it is supported in Linux, Windows, Mac OS and the Palm OS.

According to anti-OOXML organization, 75 percent of the participating members approved OOXML while 14 percent voted it down. To win, Microsoft needed at least 66 percent in favor.

Groklaw had little to say on the matter this morning, but posted a report alleging that France had changed its No vote to Abstain because HP helped Microsoft France lobby hard on OOXML's behalf.

Matusow railed a bit on anti-OOXML forces that have demonized Microsoft's attempt to win ISO approval for an XML-based document format, saying that the format is the cumulative work of many people from many countries and will integrate changes the ISO committee requested after its meeting in Geneva earlier this year.

"The FUD-throwers will paint a picture of Microsoft taking unilateral action and thus this result. Anyone saying that is either purposely obfuscating the truth or spectacularly ignorant," Matusow said.

"Microsoft has committed to implementing IS 29500 in its next version of MS Office, and we will document that implementation in accordance with the interoperability principles we announced earlier this year," he wrote.

"Lobbying” was thrown about in an accusatory manner by both sides, but the pejorative hides what are some truly critical issues. Frankly, I welcome the fact that OSS advocates, private industry, NGOs, academics, and even other government agencies reached out to each other to discuss these issues. The invective that often accompanied some of these activities was unfortunate – but the end result was an overall, relatively deep discussion."

Topics: Collaboration, Emerging Tech, Enterprise Software, Microsoft, Software, Software Development

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

74 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Long live the Microsoft Zimbabwe standard

    In recognition of ISO adoption of IS 29500 it will hence forth be formally known ans the Zimbabwe stand.

    Microsoft vote riggers (sorry I mean keen standards followers) were quoted as saying "we learnt all about ballot padding from Mr Mugabe"

    A Microsoft employee was quoted as saying "this proves our standard is acceptable to all users" "we are only sorry that Mr Mugabe failed in his bid to retain power in his election"

    Non the less we will be promoting the Zimbabwe standard from now on.
    martin23
  • Send all government correspondence in ODF

    Say that you can't afford to support Microsoft at home as well as through taxes. Point out that Capitalism should succeed on its own merit and not through taxpayers contributions.
    mark@...
    • Dear Mr. Mark;

      Your recent letter to this office arrived in a format our computers were unable to read. Please resubmit the material in a format which may be read by software in widespread use.

      You may make reference to this note in subsequent correspondence if necessary to avoid disqualification for having failed to meet a deadline. Acceptance of late submissions may be possible, and the unexpected effects of obsolete or damaged software have sometimes been accepted as a reason for delay.

      Thank you.
      Anton Philidor
      • Rich Text Format is also good

        Speaking only for the US Federal Government, RTF is a good alternative to DOC and especially DOCX.

        Professional documents do not need the "las vegas" text effect, as well as most of the other fluff (aka "features") that Microsoft Word has.

        What's even scarier is trying to save a simple Microsoft Word document as an HTM page-so much crap goes into the source, compared to a raw text editor, it makes Adobe's Dreamweaver look tame.
        DonRupertBitByte
        • I'm glad to see...

          ...that your humility only allows you to speak for the Federal
          Government.
          MalumRegnat\
      • "in a format which may be read by software in which is in widespread use"

        ODF is currently in use on 100million desktops and rising.
        OOXML is in use on Zero desktops, since Office 2007 format is different to ECMA_OOXML which is different to ISO_OOXML.

        Moreover, Microsoft itself has made an ODF plugin for Office.

        So frankly, you're just talking c**p as usual Anton.

        I, like many expected ISO to be corrupted, and we expected Microsoft to corrupt. Anyone that knows XML takes a look at OOXML and laughs. It's truly technically lousy.

        The only thing this whole process has done is prove that:
        1. Money can buy anything.
        2. Microsoft is finished (if it has to destroy International Standards organizations in order to get it's format approved).
        Recent face plants by Microsoft include: xbox360, vista, office 2007, and now OOXML.

        I predict that ISO henceforth is a spent force, since things like SMTP and TCP/IP and ODF were developed by non-commercial open source methods. More similar standardization will continue to occur through open-ness of the internet. Everything open to inspection by anyone. No more closed door voting by elites who are plainly all to open to corruption.
        stevey_d
        • ODF Plugin for MS Office

          "Moreover, Microsoft itself has made an ODF plugin for Office."

          Sorry - Sun had to write that one, as Microsoft isn't capable of implementing something as elegant as the ODF spec.

          -Mike
          SpikeyMike
          • LOL, true, they can't even write a standard

            and it's therefore no surprise that their software is so bloated and buggy.
            mark@...
        • The ODF plugin must be installed.

          And if an organization does not choose to install it, doesn't bother to find out about its existence, then ODF becomes an anomaly.

          The point made by exaggeration in the initial post is that choosing to use ODF doesn't force others to respond.


          And I think the process was politicized by both sides, with ODF used by competitors and antagonists as a weapon. If Office were required to use ODF for saving, some features Microsoft thinks of as sales advantages would not be available.

          IBM and others announced their intent to oppose Microsoft's standards effort politically. Microsoft responded politically.

          If standards efforts are to be depoliticized, I think that voting by nations is inappropriate and that the requirements for qualification should be so carefully spelled out that anyone with sufficient expertise can make the decision to approve or disapprove automatically. And the corporate name of the applicant should be ignored.

          Microsoft played the game as it was and won. To avoid similar embarrassments, the rules should be changed.
          Anton Philidor
          • played the game well? are you crazy

            this is going to be a constant source of amusement for me for the next, I guess three years at least. This will be a spear in the side of Microsoft, mark my words. So much for reformed behaviour after the court cases.

            "corporate name of the applicant should be ignored"... you cannot be serious. What you're saying is that ballot stacking by Microsoft should not be detectable.

            And it hasn't won. ISO to date hasn't announced anything.
            Interesting indeed that microsoft and ECMA claim victory, although ISO hasn't made a ruling.

            Re: microsoft sales advantage features. Perhaps you're unaware that if someone does implement the OOXML standard (there are some mad crazy people out there) then these features will no longer be microsoft sales advantage features? And therefore this whole argument of yours is null and void.
            I can't imagine what features you mean though. The fact OOXML is riddled with errors and bugs must mean this is the shoddiest standard ever if it gets approved. Not to mention an absolutely awful XML standard.

            Hardly a matter for pride I think.
            To any expert in XML, OOXML's lousy-ness is self-evident, and unavoidable.
            stevey_d
          • Auditions

            It's said that applicants for a position with symphony orchestras play behind a curtain so that only the sound is available to those determining whom to hire.

            That in priciple excludes a number of possible biases.

            My reference to ignoring the name of the provider of a proposed standard had a similar intent. ODF was a standard developed in part to reduce Microsoft Office's market share and the campaign against Microsoft was blatant.

            Microsoft's counter-effort may have been heroic, but I suspect some of the tactics would not be admirable under scrutiny.

            That's not an edifying standards process, is it?!

            I suggest that the organization reconsider the process so as to remove politicking. Let the proposal come from behind a curtain like the musician's sound. That has the beneficial effect that standards will have more crdibility than they do immediately after this incident.
            Anton Philidor
          • I kind of agree, but

            - Microsoft is a company that polarises a vocal element, is a monopoly and has a track record for infringing anti-trust rules.

            - Office is another monopoly, in a huge and lucrative market.

            - Being able to open electronic documents is of huge important to us as a society.

            These are inseparable political aspects of the DIS 29500 process.

            Further more, I think that establishing OOXML as an ISO standard, and thus placing control on it outside of Microsoft is so important, this is should have been done no matter how bad the standard was.

            The key problem to this whole process, in my opinion, was friction between the desire to it made a standard, and the implication that it would then it immediately qualify as an acceptable standard for governments.
            TheTruthisOutThere@...
          • Be careful what you wish for.

            These standards are supposed to be implementable by anyone and everyone. I think you know OOXML isn't going to hold up well under that measure.
            odubtaig
          • What you are proposing

            Is "The Microsaoft Way". Conducting secretive under-cover business, just like the Mafia of old.

            NO THANKS! Governmental, regulatory, and public business should be conducted openly and scrutinized by the public.

            Ever heard of the "Sunshine Law"? I thought not! You're too busy promoting the "Microsoft Law".
            Ole Man
          • If standards efforts are to be depoliticized

            Not even necessary. International Open Document Standards have just been negated (eliminated) by Microsoft's bribery, arm-twisting, and nefarious activities.

            This does NOT mean the end of Open Documents, by any means, so is no reason for you to crow and cackle about it. The only significant meaning of this so-called "victory" is Microsoft retaining their ability to hold hostage properly bribed Government Documents.

            Nothing new. Samo samo. Just a big farce to pull the wool over YOUR eyes.
            Ole Man
          • If MS Office used ODF

            [b]If Office were required to use ODF for saving, some features Microsoft thinks of as sales advantages would not be available.
            [/b]

            They would be if Microsoft chose to make them so.
            tracy anne
          • If Microsoft rewrote ODF...

            ... to make it functionally equivalent to the formats the company developed, how soon would IBM approve the chnages? Soon enough to assure that its allies were unable to make any market gains?

            In that sense, for Microsoft to accept and work with ODF would be to create a permanently political conflict. Committees in which a gain to one member is a loss to another move slowly and disappoint.
            Anton Philidor
          • If Microsoft rewrote ODF...?

            What kind of insane blather is that? Do you think Microsoft now owns ODF?

            How about if ODF rewrote Windows.... or Microsoft Office, even. Makes about as much sense!
            Ole Man
          • Yes. The rules will have to be changed, or one day

            someone will deliver a "standard" that contain a virus. Being as "undue pressure", stacking, etc. is allowed, what is there to stop that happening. After all: the technical standard did not count.
            hkommedal
      • More threats from the peanut gallery?

        After their taskmasters have already whipped all opposition into line with their sanctimonious sacrilege?

        A snake may surprise himself when he swallows his own tail and his lips meet his belly. What will he do then, as you cackle your approval?
        Ole Man