08.25.08
Watch Out, OASIS
“The disparity of rules for PAS, Fast-Track and ISO committee generated standards is fast making ISO a laughing stock in IT circles.”
–Martin Bryan, Former Convenor of OOXML WG1
It might seem as though Microsoft could ruin soon OASIS just as it ruined ISO with ECMA. Even the IEEE and a certain situation irked some observers after it had gotten closer to ISO. OASIS, being one that thrives in openness and transparency, needs none of Microsoft, yet according to this, Microsoft might want to treat it like it already (mis)treats ODF. It gives away money. Has the world forgotten how viciously Microsoft attacked ODF [1, 2] and at a later stage slammed OASIS as well, especially through its ‘talking heads’?
Regarding this latest development, Pamela Jones at Groklaw wrote: “I gather OASIS has no sense of irony. It’s a Security Challenges for the Information Society conference, September 30 through October 3 in New London: “The Forum will provide a unique opportunity for the security standards community (public sector, private sector and standards developing organizations) to come together to discuss current issues and challenges, strategic approaches, recent successes, and future outlooks.” Microsoft is a Gold sponsor, and DTrace is Platinum, which is a higher category, but the OASIS newsletter titles the item, “Microsoft sponsors upcoming OASIS Security Forum near London”. And so it begins, I fear.”
Does Microsoft suddenly think that OASIS is not all that bad? Is this just presence? Does it want to make it worse, so as to make it “equally ruined” w.r.t. ISO? Speaking of ‘talking heads, Patrick Durusau can’t help unleashing some outrageous letters. A new rebuttal:
Unlike editors as Durusau Microsoft standardisation participants are loyal drones of their company’s standard they edit. SC34 won’t be able to do anything which is not approved or developed in the United States. External input would be ignored unless there is a leverage. We saw it during the process. “Vendor capture” as we call it. The whole situation makes a joke out of international standardisation institutions. ISO should be as concerned as industry veterans are.
So why surrender to perpetrators because Durusau finds it more cozy? I have to admit, that is the wrong question. The true evil ISO perpetrator is IBM, a company behind everything…
ODF is not IBM. Far from it. So, what are these letters about anyway [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]? █
“That particular meeting was followed by an anonymous smear campaign against one of the TC members. A letter was faxed to the organization of the TC member in question, accusing the TC member in question of helping politicize the issue (which is, of course, untrue). I too had the dubious pleasure of hearing first hand how Microsoft attempted to remove me from the TC (they did not succeed, thanks to integrity and cojones of the organization I am affiliated with).”
“If this unethical behaviour by Microsoft was not sufficiently despicable, they did the unthinkable by involving politics in what should have been a technical evaluation of the standard by writing to the head of the Malaysian standards organization and getting its business partners to engage in a negative letter writing campaign to indicate lack of support of ODF in the Malaysian market. Every single negative letter on ODF received by the Malaysian standards organization was written either by Microsoft, or a Microsoft business partner or a Microsoft affiliated organization (Initiative for Software Choice and IASA).“
Content is available under CC-BY-SA
Penny Lane said,
August 25, 2008 at 6:54 pm
Microsoft has been participating in OASIS for years Roy, they were on the board almost a decade ago… may still be, I have not looked for a while.
If you look back through the history you’ll find that they’re charter members of some of the TCs and have a bunch of people sat in different places as participants and observers.
Dan O'Brian said,
August 26, 2008 at 7:31 am
Penny:
Rarely does Roy Schestowitz have a clue in anything he says, he’s known for not researching any material before he makes accusations.
He claims he doesn’t have time, but he sure seems to have plenty of it considering he spams dozens of un-researched stories per day across the internet.
Roy Schestowitz said,
August 26, 2008 at 7:39 am
I guess we have a heckler here called Dan O’Brian, who jumps at every opportunity to sling a rock at the messenger.
Penny Lane, what do you make of PJ’s assessment?
Baby In The Bath Water said,
August 26, 2008 at 10:27 am
Interesting how you throw the baby out with the bath water, Roy.
Since you are unable to counter Dan’s claims, I take it to mean that he is correct in what he states. Of course, your input on the matter is irrelevant because it is a well-documented fact – thanks largely to your diligence in documenting your own cluelessness on this very website.
Neglecting research so that you can smear some one/group/company more times per day only aids in discrediting yourself.
You should embrace quality over quantity, Roy. The other way around just makes you look like a troll.
Note: this comment was posted from Novell’s headquarters.
Roy Schestowitz said,
August 26, 2008 at 12:07 pm
This is a blog-style site. I do more research for more formal things.
Gus said,
August 26, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Laugh-laugh! Homeric laughter! It’s not because you’re lazy. We all know you don’t WANT to know the truth, that’s why you don’t do research!
Roy Schestowitz said,
August 26, 2008 at 4:58 pm
I didn’t say that Microsoft was uninvolved in OASIS. It does, however, invest money in the same body is seems to have ridiculed.
Gus said,
August 26, 2008 at 5:22 pm
Yeah, yeah; whatever…
Penny Lane said,
August 26, 2008 at 7:57 pm
I’m not sure where you get the “ridiculed” idea from, it is pretty absurd given the number of Microsoft people who appear to have been involved in OASIS for so many years.