Where is there an end of it? | More Standards News …

More Standards News …

… Big …

For those who missed it, last week ISO announced the appointment of a new Secretary General from 2009, Mr Rob Steele. By reputation Mr Steele is something of a moderniser, widely held to have had a very positive impact at Standards New Zealand in his role there as CEO. His written opinions too speak of somebody engaged with the challenges faced within international standardisation today. It is to hoped that from his lofty perch within ISO he will also be a force for the good in facilitating the necessary change JTC 1 so badly needs.

… and Small …

By zooming down from the Secretary General through three levels of subcommittee we can end up at the shiny new working group of SC 34’s WG 4, established for the maintenance of IEC/ISO 29500 (aka OOXML). I was delighted to learn recently that Denmark’s excellent Jesper Lund Stocholm has been appointed as Dansk Standard’s technical expert for this WG (kudos to CIBER for supporting this work). It is great to see this kind of independent expertise coalescing around this important new standard. Excitement is already mounting about this group’s first meeting scheduled to take place in Okinawa in January 2009, alongside WG 5 which is concentrating on document interop. Did I really hear it right that one country is considering sending a delegation of 6 experts to Okinawa?

Jesper Lund Stocholm
Jesper Lund Stocholm

Comments (11) -

  • carlos

    10/28/2008 9:10:18 AM |

    "this group’s first meeting scheduled to take place in Okinawa in January 2009"

    mmm.. at this pace, i'm afraid that the work in JTC1 regarding the specification known as "29500 standard" will be totally irrelevant ant merely nominal

  • Alex

    10/28/2008 5:21:05 PM |


    I believe WG4 is planning to augment its (4 times a year) face-to-face meetings with a fairly intensive teleconferencing schedule (weekly has been mentioned).

    I hope that allays your fears about the pace being too slow!

  • carlos

    10/29/2008 12:02:27 AM |

    "I hope that allays your fears about the pace being too slow!"

    thanks for the info, alex ( and for the [may be] good news )

  • David

    10/29/2008 10:23:44 AM |

    Given how you spectacularly failed to satisfactorily deal with the issues relating to resolving the thousands of technical flaws and faults in a 6000 page specification that was inanely put through a fast track process and faced opposition from many people world wide, and where there has been much meddling by Microsoft, why have you not resigned in shame from all involvement in the ISO?

    Surely you must realis that you have NO credibility?

  • Juan Mora

    10/29/2008 10:14:51 PM |

    If he, Jesper, stays on target, just working for ooxml, as the Microsoft sockpuppet he is, and keeps his hands off ODF, everything will be OK.

    @David, Alex Brown still alive? I thought he'd done the honorable thing and committed SEPUKU.

  • Jesper Lund Stocholm

    10/31/2008 5:29:23 PM |


    Thank you for the kind words. I have not really gotten my head around the scope of my activities in ISO on a more general note. As you know, there is the concrete contributions in WG4 (where I have been appointed by the Danish NSB) but there is also the more "informal" contributions in the Danish NSB itself. I have not a desire to join WG5 to work on the interoperability guidelines, but a couple of other members of the Danish NSB are looking into if they can.

    About being a sock-puppet (wouldn't the correct word be 'suck-puppet?'), well I think Microsoft and I disagree on many more things than you could possibly imagine.

    And btw - as long as OASIS refuses to coorporate on the coordination of the work on ODF with ISO, there is no work being done on ODF in ISO at all ... at least until something new is submitted via the PAS fast track procedure.


  • Juan Mora

    11/1/2008 12:38:25 PM |

    Sorry if it sounded crass. Posted from the USA where I'm at currently, but country of origin is Brasil. Too much ambiguity and questionable behavior has gone on, not without being noticed, when it comes to the ISO. Too much disparity has gone on for tempers to be changed.

    In essence what was once a respected organization has been pretty much destroyed by Microsoft (a convicted monopolist in the USA and in the EU). Outside of doing a 180, we do not see any credibility in ISO and that pretty much is the general consensus.

    In my native country, and you've probably read the letter signed representatives of other developing countries, ISO is irrelevant as standards go. Many here have given Microsoft the benefit of a doubt, but they continually keep lying, cheating, bribing, anti-competitiveness practices, and getting caught on it. The fact that so called developed nations are not outraged by this type of outright criminal behavior is puzzling by any means. Any organization that has dealings with Microsoft is automatically suspect in any endeavor.

    I'm just a normal everyday working class stiff venting ranting against what, not only I see, but at what is not transparent anymore.

    Good luck with trying to fix ooxml; you're going to need it; just keep Microsoft, by proxy or directly, from tainting and infecting ODF.

  • Andre

    11/2/2008 7:28:51 AM |

    Jesper, so you accuse OASIS of refusing an ODF hijack?

  • Jesper Lund Stocholm

    11/4/2008 3:38:57 AM |


    Many here have given Microsoft the benefit of a doubt, but they continually keep lying, cheating, bribing, anti-competitiveness practices, and getting caught on it.
    What you are describing here are really superb reasons for stepping up to the plate. Every time someone complains about Microsoft doing this or that, it should be a roll-call for all of "you" to buckle up and get on with the job.

    Seriously - my involvement has nothing to do with giving Microsoft the benefit of the doubt. It has nothing to do with hoping that they will behave. It has nothing to do with thanking Microsoft for submitting OOXML to ECMA and ISO and thereby "granting" us a say with respect to future development of OOXML.

    On the contrary - it has a whole lot to do with making sure Microsoft does what it has comitted to in the last 18 months.

    Instead of bitching and whining (and I am not referring directly to you, Juan), you should get your acts together and contribute to the work in ISO thereby making sure that approving OOXML in ISO and fighting to get maintenance of it in ISO was not done in vain.

    The worst possible scenario for OOXML in ISO is that no-one but ECMA participates in the work. The worst possible scenario is that after all this work - nobody steps up. A lot of people will likely say, that this was the kiss of death for ISO. Who knows - maybe they will be right. But I do know that it will not be caused by those of us that chose to participate. The fault will be on those that did nothing.

  • Juan Mora

    11/8/2008 3:46:20 PM |

    Ignoring the NB appeals is not going to generate any contributions to ISO.

Comments are closed