GNOME and OOXML

Some basic facts about what the ECMA TC45 is proceeding with at this time so readers can
better understand the consiqueses of GNOME injecting themselves into this process. And putting
a stamp on this MS lead industrial cartel at ECMA with the Chairman and Co-Charmain MS
employees and all the other participant votes YES (besides IBM) for Fast Track approval and
sent to ISO. Please note it is in the interest of all the parties at ECMA TC45 for OOXML to be
ISO. (IBM partipated in the innitial vote only to make their position known clearly) All the
partipants now (IBM not present) at the ECMA TC45 were in that innitial YES vote and are
helping resolove comments so that OOXML becomes and ISO.

Robert Wier of IBM on the ODF List
"The practical difficulty here is that of timing.  While I have no
doubt that Jody was instrumental in getting additional technical
disclosures from Microsoft back in 2006, Ecma TC45 is not in that mode
of operation right now.  The OOXML standard Ecma 376 has already been
approved by Ecma.  It is now before JTC1 as DIS 29500 and the text is
essentially frozen since December 2006.  The only changes that can be
made to it must be in response to specific JTC1 national body ballot 
comments.  Jody can no longer go to a TC45 meeting and say, "Gee, I'd
like more information added on X, Y and Z".  JTC1 rules forbid changes
to the standard that are not traceable to a national body comment. 

Certainly, Jody or any other Ecma TC45 member so inclined can help
Microsoft address the thousands of ISO comments that were received,
and help prep OOXML for approval by JTC1.  There is certainly a lot of
grunt work to be done there.  But let's not call that anything but
what it is -- helping Microsoft gain ISO approval.

From Richard Stallman on the Gnome list today:
 
"Is joining ECMA TC45 really like using a library?  According to your
own words, it is engaged in modifying the OOXML spec:

    That is inaccurate.  Whom do you think will be responding to
    national body issues ?  ECMA, and by proxy TC45, have the ability to 
    propose changes in the spec to resolve issues, and to raise their
    own issues preemptively for resolution.

I gather that such modification intended to bring about the acceptance
of OOXML as an ISO standard.  (Please correct me if I'm wrong.) 

If that is the case, anyone who is represented on the ECMA committee
is helping to promote the ISO acceptance of OOXML -- which would hurt
our community substantially.  If the GNOME Foundation is to be
represented in on the ECMA committee, it should explicitly counteract 
that backfire effect by doing something else.

One way to do so is by publishing a statement, addressed to all
countries that vote in ISO, asking them to vote against any and all
versions of OOXML as a standard"