There's been some talk in Kyoto of the benefits for all of uniting behind one existing ISO standard for office documents, rather than its confusingly-similarly-named successor.

That standard, of course, is ISO 8613 Open Document Architecture (ODA)

Many SC 34 veterans remember the extreme angst and politics resulting from the huge commercial interests at play from word-processor vendors when this was standardised (Wang and Olivetti to name but two). ODA was standardised over approximately ten years, finally appearing around 1990. Interestingly the final standard, though incredibly ambitious, never enjoyed any mainstream (or any?) implementations. With its use of SGML and vector graphics it was undoubtedly ahead of its time, and anticipates the XML + vector graphics flavour of today's XML office document specifications.

Meanwhile, back in the modern world I have been acclimatising to Kyoto (and its time zone - melatonin how I love thee), and reviewing/preparing material for the meetings which start tomorrow. One late addition to this is a submission from Japan of an ODF defect report - in translation over 100 fresh errors emerged in the specification which need correction. No doubt this will be one of many ODF/OOXML issues which will be informing the next few days of work ...

Yes, it's Kyoto – and specifically a meeting of ISO/IEC JTC 1 SC 34, which I shall (time permitting) cover over the coming days ...


Haruka


Kinkaku-ji Temple (The Golden Pavilion)


“Washes the posterior”

The ISO/IEC JTC 1 SC 34 Secretariat manager has re-iterated in the latest member correspondence that the deadline is approaching for ISO/IEC members to register for the OOXML Ballot Resolution Meeting scheduled for the end of February 2008.


Registration is open to all member bodies that voted in the 2 September 2007 ballot. The message is: register soon or risk not being able to attend the BRM …

A Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document for the upcoming ISO/IEC DIS 29500 BRM has now been published on the SC 34 site here. Students of the process are advised to study it!

OOXML Will Eat Your Babies!

At least, I wouldn't be surprised to read such a headline next, judging by the self-parodic heights which the noooxml campaign has scaled with its recent video. It will be a relief when the technical work ramps up again and contentful communication is resumed.

To this end, Ecma have been busy (very busy I imagine) de-duping the national body comments. The exercise has revealed that the 3,522 submitted comments are composed of 1,030 distinct ones, and it is these which will be addressed by the ballot resolution process. The informal liaison between Ecma and National Bodies is already under way, and Ecma have established a "portal" web site (password protected) which bona fide NB members may use to view Ecma's activities on the text.

UK Activity

In the UK BSI has resolved to re-establish the 29-person technical panel IST/41/-/1 to provide BSI information on whether Ecma is resolving the UK's comments satisfactorily. It's likely this will be done using the open Wiki originally used for the panel's initial comment gathering. I am stepping down as panel convenor as part of my neutralisation process prior to chairing the BRM, and will be replaced by my able colleague (and SC 34 WG 1 convenor) Martin Bryan.

Towards a BRM FAQ

I have been working closely with ISO/IEC to write a FAQ on the BRM which seeks to shine a light into the some of the darker nooks of the JTC 1 Directives and clarify the process details. A draft is in circulation and this should be published soon. Readers of this blog should find little to surprise them, though one new piece of information is, that if the BRM agrees a new text then NBs have a whole 30 days in which they may opt to switch their vote. I predict this period may seem some intensive lobbying — especially if the vote is tight, though by that time all the technical work will, thankfully, have been done.

The Clogging of SC 34

A fair bit has been written about the paralysing effect on SC 34 of its large number of inactive new members, and some commentary has read this as a kind of strike against OOXML/Microsoft. As Rick Jelliffe has noted though, the truth is more complicated. It would be more accurate to say that the recent interest in Office formats (ODF too) has prompted the increased membership, and that a number of countries (21 in fact) have not responded to any recent ballots, causing those ballots to fail.

The situation is intolerable, and one project editor has already complained bitterly that while he has worked assiduously on his text over many years, shepherding it through its committee stage votes, it is galling to see it halted by the activity surrounding another standard that is being waved on along the red carpet, despite having failed its only vote (so far).

Ironicically, these countries did not need to join SC 34 in order to influence DIS 29500 (that's a JTC 1 vote). In fact JTC 1 itself looks likely to experience similar "clogging" because of its increased membership. Indeed, I understand the recent JTC 1 meeting in Brisbane was only quorate (50% rule) because of some late arrivals to the meeting!

Let us hope the new National Bodies discharge their voting responsibilities in future (the situation is gradually improving). If not, I understand the wheels are already in motion to sanction serial offenders by demoting them to observer status within ISO/IEC.

Preparing for Kyoto

The upcoming SC 34 meeting in Kyoto is likely to repeat the pattern of recent meetings, with a large number of attendees hoping to discuss ODF and/or OOXML. Again, they are likely to be disappointed as these topics are not on the agenda (with the exception, perhaps, of Ecma's proposed maintenance agreement for any IS 29500).

It is fair to assume, however, that DIS 29500 will figure in talk in the bars and along the corridors.

One tangential development is that the UK has proposed that a new working group (WG) is established within SC 34 for handling Office document formats. This is a practical proposal to solve the current problem whereby people interested in two distinct areas (DSDL is one; Office formats is the other) have to meet in the same room. Should it happen, the new working group will certainly prove a lively one ...