The result, by Andy Updegrove: http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=20080229055319...
Sean Daly interviews Andy Updegrove http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080229171250199
I'm no ISO procedure expert, but my understanding is: after 5 days of discussion, the voting members at ISO's Ballot Resolution Meeting decided not to approve the OOXML specification. There simply wasn't enough time to discuss the numerous problems and the numerous proposed solutions. The final decision will be in 30 days time, but since the issues raised last September are officially unresolved, rejection by ISO is almost certain.
In the interview, Andy explains the importance of standards in society (access to government), why the ISO process was creaking under the strain of this application, and some comments on anti-trust law.
And if this puts you in the celebrating spirit, get involved in Document Freedom Day this March 26th: http://documentfreedom.org/
It seems my Friday night reading of the ISO BRM coverage was overly optimistic. It's true that the national bodies didn't have time to even look at 80% of the problems with the spec, and the vote confirmed that the national bodies do not see the issues as having been resolved by the BRM, but despite this, people who were in Geneva tell me that it still looks realistic that OOXML *will* get ISO approval.
It's not obvious to me how that can be the case, but it is. So there's one more month of work to do before the real decision.
I've collected some good press and blog coverage here: http://fsfe.org/en/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/coming_month_...
On Monday, March 3, 2008 at 10:53 +0000, Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:
It seems my Friday night reading of the ISO BRM coverage was overly optimistic. It's true that the national bodies didn't have time to even look at 80% of the problems with the spec, and the vote confirmed that the national bodies do not see the issues as having been resolved by the BRM, but despite this, people who were in Geneva tell me that it still looks realistic that OOXML *will* get ISO approval.
Rob Weir from IBM has a description of the process inside the meeting.
http://www.robweir.com/blog/2008/03/art-of-being-mugged.html
If the vote on the final standard approval is as botched as the vote on the technical contents then I think there is a very real chance it could be approved. (on the other hand, it should be clear now to many of the voting bodies that the document they are faced with is horribly flawed. Of course, it's still rolling on despite those flaws, so this might not mean anything)