Microsoft's Open XML hits snag in standards process

Note: an update to this blog includes official comment from Microsoft and comments from a Microsoft employee who attended this same meeting.

A committee formed to devise the United States' position on Microsoft's Open XML document format voted against recommending it as an ISO standard on Friday, according to one participant.

Rob Weir, an IBM employee and advocate of the rival OpenDocument format, on Sunday detailed in his blog the proceedings of a three-hour meeting of the committee, which is accredited by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI).

Despite a number of Microsoft partners joining the committee in recent weeks, the committee did not approve recommending Open XML as an ISO standard, Weir said. He said that it failed to pass an "approval" vote by one committee member.

The ISO is in the process of considering whether to certify Office Open XML--the default XML-based document formats in Microsoft's Office 2007--as a standard. Open XML has already been approved by European standards body Ecma International, but ISO ratification is expected to carry more weight, particularly with government customers.

Weir noted that the ANSI committee vote of Friday does not indicate the final United States position on Office Open XML in the upcoming ISO vote. An executive board will review the position and read comments before the ISO vote, which is scheduled for September.

Weir participated in the committee and voted against approving Open XML as a recommended standard. But he noted that his report of the proceedings was not an official communique from ANSI.

Update: A Microsoft employee who attended the same Friday meeting called the results of the meeting a "deadlock."

Doug Mahugh, a technical evangelist at Microsoft specializing in the Office Open XML file formats, gave a detailed accounting of the voting, which showed that Microsoft did not achieve the two-thirds "approval with comments" vote it was seeking.

"This means the matter passes on to the INCITS Executive Board, where they'll try to reach a decision on how to proceed. They have until September 2 to decide on a position that the US will take," Mahugh said.

Microsoft's general manager of interoperability and standards, Tom Robertson, said Microsoft will continue to work with ANSI on developing its position.

"In addition to receiving rapid uptake among users and across the IT industry, a clear majority of the participants in the V1 (committee) process voted to recommend ISO ratification of Ecma Open XML, recognizing that this is the path to take to enable choice," Robertson said in a statement.

[`WarpKat]

In Other Words, 'Not So Fast...'

Despite my pleasure in seeing this happen, I think it's still too early to celebrate a victory. I honestly hope the ISO ratification doesn't go through for one simple reason: there already IS a standard.

Microsoft's formats have never been open standards. They've been forced standards. I still have trouble telling my email users that Outlook is responsible for the winmail.dat because of the stupid RTF settings on the other end.

[protagonistic]

RE: In Other Words, 'Not So Fast...'

"I still have trouble telling my email users that Outlook is
responsible for the winmail.dat "

I am glad to see I am not the only one with this problem. :-)
Also, I would hate to see something adopted as a standard that is
not truly open.

[Commander_Spock]

Office Open XML Not Ready For Prime Time!

That Microsoft's proposed Office Open XML >>> failed to pass an "approval" vote by one committee member <<< is an indication that it is deeply felt in some quarters that Office Open XML is not ready for prime time; so much so for a still work-in-progress (Code-Based Lotus SmartSuite) Office Application Suite...

As a point of reference here is an extract from a 1998 Lotus Development Corporation communication;

Re: "Concerning the issues with 1-2-3 that are talked about in the documentation you gave me, most of the issues are related to converting files between older and newer versions of product and converting documents between Lotus and Microsoft. Anytime a file is saved backwards or saved with an older file format than the format the file was created under, such as saving a 1-2-3 , 97 file for Windows 95 into a WK1 format for DOS, then naturally we are expected to loose certain features due to technology and features that are present now that were not present 8 - 10 years ago. Similarly, if we try to convert a file from Lotus into Excel or Excel into Lotus, due to differences in the products not every feature will be converted perfectly with the file filters that are available. Both Lotus and Microsoft create similar spreadsheet programs; however, there are several differences in both programs and these differences will remain to distinguish the products apart. We do try to design conversion filters that will allow as much of the file formats as possible to be exchanged and converted without disrupting the actual file design and format.

In one of your letters you made mention of the @IRR and @ERR functions in the 1-2-3 product. By design the @IRR (notably "absent" in Open Office) will calculate the Internal Rate of Return; where the @ERR is used in conjunction with other formulas, posted was an "ERR" showing an error was received in the calculations. As far as I can see in the program I cannot find an @ERR function that will allow us to calculate an Economic Rate of Return"

Note:
Arriving late (and well dressed up with fancy ribbons and all) at the party does not guarantee you (Microsoft) the unanimous nods of the "American National Standards Institute (ANSI)" and ISO Judges!

[Maclover1]

Spock

come back to present time. No one uses Lotus products anymore. If they do it is only because there transistion to a something everyone else uses has been delayed for some reason.

I seen it all. A lotus fan boy.