|
|
| OpenDocument Approved by ISO/IEC |
 |
|
Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 08:59 AM EDT
|
Andrew Updegrove has the happy news. ODF is now ISO/IED 26300. He writes: The six month voting window for ISO/IEC adoption of the OASIS OpenDocument Format (ODF) standard closed on May 1, and at midnight (Geneva time) last night it was announced internally that ODF had been approved by the ISO members eligible and interested in casting a vote. The vote passed with broad participation and no negative votes (there were a few abstentions), and ODF is now ISO/IEC 26300. While there are still some procedural steps internal to ISO/IEC that are required before the official text of the standard will be finalized and issued, these steps (described below) are formalities rather than gating factors. No doubt there will be more information later today, so keep checking his blog for the latest on this story, and I'll update this article too as more information arrives.
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: entre on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 09:11 AM EDT |
| Too small for typos. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 09:11 AM EDT |
Was Microsoft, perhaps, one who abstained?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 09:24 AM EDT |
This is great news. It will be a big boost for Open Standards.
Does anyone know if the votes will be made public?
While no one apparently voted against adoption, it would be interesting to see
who participated and who abstained.
---
Rsteinmetz - IANAL therefore my opinions are illegal.
"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."
Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jbeadle on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 09:32 AM EDT |
And try to make clicky links...
Thanks,
-jb[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- w00t! - Authored by: desertrat on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 10:03 AM EDT
- Seconded - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 10:30 AM EDT
- Better buy your last monitor soon - Authored by: DebianUser on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 10:49 AM EDT
- An Interestingly Relevant Item in the News Today - Authored by: dwmosman on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 12:00 PM EDT
- Way off topic, MS vs OS - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 12:20 PM EDT
- Darl McBride in da news - Authored by: SeismoGuy on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 03:10 PM EDT
- OT here please... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 04:02 PM EDT
- really OT ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 04:40 PM EDT
- really OT ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 05:22 PM EDT
- The Big Might SUN loves ya - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 04:38 PM EDT
- heximation - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 05:04 PM EDT
- Holding my Breath - Authored by: Steve Martin on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 05:09 PM EDT
- IBM accused of hacking lawyers', clients' email - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 06:38 PM EDT
- MPAA has new piracy loss estimates - Authored by: Jude on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 07:28 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Observer on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 09:38 AM EDT |
| There were some observations earlier about how Microsoft had gotten one of their
representatives on a key committee with respect to the ISO adoption of the ODF,
and that they might quietly cause roadblocks and delays to the adoption.
Unfortunately, it's still too early in the morning for my brain to dig up all
the details. However, it sounds now like there was no delay. Is the assumption
that Microsoft chose to keep its mouth shut at this point? You think they might
be there not to slow down ODF, but rather to help speed along their own format
when the time comes?
---
The Observer [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Boundless on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 09:48 AM EDT |
Is it safe to assume that the as-adopted standard will
remain available for no charge at opendocumentfellowship.org?
I've had to buy ISO standards in the past, and they can
be hard to find and expensive. I've also participated in
standards development, and frequently seen freely-avail-
-draft stds become available only for a fee upon adoption.
_________
I'm guessing you will be able to buy a hardcopy
of ISO/IED 26300, but no one will. True?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: amhagp on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 05:13 PM EDT |
I hope this is nail number one of many into the coffin of proprietary (or
succintly put, exclusionary) file formats!!
---
--
It makes the most sense to use Industry Standards, not Microsoft standards.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Excellent news - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 04 2006 @ 08:01 AM EDT
| |
| Authored by: xtifr on Wednesday, May 03 2006 @ 06:20 PM EDT |
I hate to borrow a slashdottism, but if you RTFA ("Read The Fine
Article"--and a fine article it is), you'll see that this is merely one more
step in the process. The ISO rules require at least one more meeting to discuss
any comments that may have been submitted along with these votes, and that
meeting must take place no less than two-and-a-half months after the
ballot! After that (assuming that everyone agrees at that point), there may be
up to thirty days before the final report and the standard itself are
issued.
To put it another way (assuming that I correctly understand the
process), the standard has been approved, but not ratified, and will not be
ratified and made official until, probably, August or so.
On the bright
side, this presumably means that MS's own ugly
standards will face similar delays when they reach ISO. :)
---
Do
not meddle in the affairs of Wizards, for it makes them soggy and hard to light. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
