Office Open XML Intermediate 5 Month Ballot Results

During the standardization of Office Open XML, Ecma International submitted its Office Open XML File Formats standard (ECMA-376) to the ISO Fast Track process. After a comment period, the ISO held a ballot that closed September 2007. This has been observed to be perhaps the most controversial and unusual ISO ballot ever convened, both in the number of comments in opposition, and in unusual actions during the voting process. Various factions have strongly supported and opposed this fast track process. On the supporting side were primarily Microsoft affiliated companies; on the opposing side were free- or open-source software organizations, IBM and affiliates, Sun Microsystems, and Google.

There have been reports of attempted vote buying,^[1][2][3][4] heated verbal confrontations, refusal to come to consensus and other very unusual behavior in national standards bodies.^[5][6][7][8] This is said to be unprecedented for standards bodies, which usually act together and have generally worked to resolve concerns amicably.

87 ISO member countries responded to the five-month ballot. There were 51 votes of "approval", 18 votes of "disapproval" and 18 abstentions.^[9] For the measure to pass, ²⁄₃ of "P" members (participating, as opposed to "O" members: observing) must approve and less than ¹⁄₄ of all voting national members (excluding members that abstain from voting) must disapprove. The ballot shows 53% approval by "P" members and 26% disapproval from the total votes.

Results

The following table shows the results by member of the balloting that ended 2 September 2007:^[10]

Country	Standards Body	Membership	Vote
Argentina	IRAM	O Member	Abstention
Chile	INN	O Member	Abstention
Israel	SII	O Member	Abstention
Luxembourg	SEE	O Member	Abstention
Mexico	DGN	O Member	Abstention
Peru	INDECOPI	O Member	Abstention
Viet Nam	TCVN	O Member	Abstention
Australia	SA	P Member	Abstention
Belgium	NBN	P Member	Abstention
Finland	SFS	P Member	Abstention
Italy	UNI	P Member	Abstention
Malaysia	DSM	P Member	Abstention
Netherlands	NEN	P Member	Abstention
Slovenia	SIST	P Member	Abstention
Spain	AENOR	P Member	Abstention
Trinidad and Tobago	TTBS	P Member	Abstention
Mauritius	MSB		Abstention
Zimbabwe	SAZ		Abstention
Armenia	SARM	O Member	Approval
Belarus	BELST	O Member	Approval
Costa Rica	INTECO	O Member	Approval
Croatia	HZN	O Member	Approval
Cuba	NC	O Member	Approval
Egypt	EOS	O Member	Approval
Morocco	SNIMA	O Member	Approval
Romania	ASRO	O Member	Approval
Russian Federation	GOST R	O Member	Approval
Serbia	ISS	O Member	Approval
Sri Lanka	SLSI	O Member	Approval
Ukraine	DSSU	O Member	Approval
Azerbaijan	AZSTAND	P Member	Approval
Côte-d'Ivoire	CODINORM	P Member	Approval
Cyprus	CYS	P Member	Approval
Jamaica	JBS	P Member	Approval
Kazakhstan	KAZMEMST	P Member	Approval
Lebanon	LIBNOR	P Member	Approval
Pakistan	PSQCA	P Member	Approval
Saudi Arabia	SASO	P Member	Approval
Bangladesh	BSTI		Approval
Barbados	BNSI		Approval
Bosnia and Herzegovina	BAS		Approval
Congo, The Democratic Republic of	OCC		Approval
Fiji	FTSQCO		Approval
Kuwait	KOWSMD		Approval
Nigeria	SON		Approval
Panama	COPANIT		Approval
Qatar	QS		Approval
Syrian Arab Republic	SASMO		Approval
Tanzania, United Rep. of	TBS		Approval
United Arab Emirates	ESMA		Approval
Uzbekistan	UZSTANDARD		Approval
Austria	ON	O Member	Approval with comments
Bulgaria	BDS	O Member	Approval with comments
Colombia	ICONTEC	O Member	Approval with comments
Greece	ELOT	O Member	Approval with comments
Poland	PKN	O Member	Approval with comments
Portugal	IPQ	O Member	Approval with comments
Tunisia	INNORPI	O Member	Approval with comments
Germany	DIN	P Member	Approval with comments
Kenya	KEBS	P Member	Approval with comments
Malta	MSA	P Member	Approval with comments
Singapore	SPRING SG	P Member	Approval with comments
Switzerland	SNV	P Member	Approval with comments
Turkey	TSE	P Member	Approval with comments
Uruguay	UNIT	P Member	Approval with comments
Venezuela	FONDONORMA	P Member	Approval with comments
USA	ANSI	Secretariat	Approval with comments
Ghana	GSB		Approval with comments
Jordan	JISM		Approval with comments
Brazil	ABNT	O Member	Disapproval
Philippines	BPS	O Member	Disapproval
Thailand	TISI	O Member	Disapproval
Canada	SCC	P Member	Disapproval
China	SAC	P Member	Disapproval
Czech Republic	CNI	P Member	Disapproval
Denmark	DS	P Member	Disapproval
Ecuador	INEN	P Member	Disapproval
France	AFNOR	P Member	Disapproval
India	BIS	P Member	Disapproval
Iran, Islamic Republic of	ISIRI	P Member	Disapproval
Ireland	NSAI	P Member	Disapproval
Japan	JISC	P Member	Disapproval
Korea, Republic of	KATS	P Member	Disapproval
New Zealand	SNZ	P Member	Disapproval
Norway	SN	P Member	Disapproval
South Africa	SABS	P Member	Disapproval
United Kingdom	BSI	P Member	Disapproval

Reconsideration of votes

On 25–29 February 2008, a Ballot Resolution Meeting was held in Geneva, Switzerland, to consider revisions to the OOXML proposal. Under ISO rules, national standards bodies have thirty days following the Ballot Resolution Meeting to reconsider and possibly change their votes.

Belgium

The Belgian Bureau de Normalisation considered the revisions, but failed to reach a consensus on the proposal. Belgium's initial abstention therefore stood.^[11]

Czech Republic

The Český Normalizační Institut considered the revisions and changed its initial vote against the proposal to a vote in favour.^[12]

Germany

The Normenausschusses Informationstechnik und Anwendungen considered the revisions and reaffirmed Germany's initial vote for the proposal.^[13]

India

The Bureau of Indian Standards considered the revisions and reaffirmed India's initial vote against the proposal.^[14]

Netherlands

The Netherlands Standardization Institute (NEN) considered the revisions and reaffirmed the Netherlands' initial abstention.^[15]

Trinidad and Tobago

The Trinidad and Tobago Bureau of Standards announced that it will change its initial abstention to a vote for the revised proposal.^[16]

United States

The International Committee on Information Technology Standards (INCITS) considered the revisions and reaffirmed the U.S.'s initial vote for the proposal.^[17]

References

1. ^ Kim Haverblad (27 August 2007). "Microsoft buys the Swedish vote on OOXML". OS2World. http://www.os2world.com/content/view/14868/1/. 
2. ^ Daniel Goldberg (29 August 2007). "Microsoft pressade partners att rösta ja [Microsoft pressed partners to vote yes]". IDG.se. http://www.idg.se/2.1085/1.118337.  (Swedish)
3. ^ Jason Matusow (30 Aug 2007). "Open XML - The Vote in Sweden". http://blogs.msdn.com/jasonmatusow/archive/2007/08/29/open-xml-the-vote-in-sweden.aspx. 
4. ^ Kim Haverblad (30 August 2007). "The Swedish OOXML vote has been declared invalid!". OS2World. http://www.os2world.com/content/view/14874/2/. 
5. ^ ISOC.nl regrets absence of Netherlands decision on OOXML. Internet Society Netherlands press release, 17 August 2007.
6. ^ FSFE formal objection to the UK14 meeting. Free Software Foundation Europe. 13 August 2007.
7. ^ Swiss Internet User Group. Letter to SNV Schweizerische Normen-Vereinigung. 14 August 2007.
8. ^ Yusseri Yusoff (5 September 2007). "OOXML is not (yet) an ISO standard, as Malaysia votes "No" ... or did we?". Open Malaysia. Archived from the original on 27 September 2009. http://web.archive.org/web/20090927204426/http://www.openmalaysiablog.com/2007/09/ooxml-is-not-ye.html. 
9. ^ "Vote closes on draft ISO/IEC DIS 29500 standard". ISO. 4 September 2007. http://www.iso.org/iso/pressrelease.htm?refid=Ref1070. 
10. ^ JTC1 SC34 download of ballots (ZIP)
11. ^ Bruno Leijnse (25 March 2008). "La Belgique s'abstient à propos d'OOxml [Belgium abstains on OOXML]". Data News. http://www.datanews.be/fr/news/90-57-17395/la-belgique-s-abstient-a-propos-d-ooxml.html.  (French)
12. ^ "Tiskové prohlášení ČNI k návrhu mezinárodní normy ISO IEC DIS 29500". Český Normalizační Institut. http://www.cni.cz/NP/NotesPortalCNI.nsf/key/informace~oznameni_a_informace~tiskove_prohlaseni_cni_k_navrhu_mezinarodni_normy_iso_iec_dis_29500?Open. ^{[dead link]} (Czech)
13. ^ "Zankapfel Dokumentenaustauschformat". eGovernment Computing. 18 March 2008. http://www.egovcom.de/srvinclude/4/1/inews_daily.asp?opt=archiv&red_nr=18255. ^{[dead link]} (German)
14. ^ Abhimanyu Radhakrishnan (20 March 2008). "Breaking news: India's final vote on MS Office file standard is 'NO'". Tech2.com India. http://www.tech2.com/india/news/software/breaking-news-indias-final-vote-on-ms-office-file-standard-is-no/32081/0. 
15. ^ Jan Rietveld. "Nederlands standpunt 'Office Open XML file formats' verandert niet". Netherlands Standardization Institute. Archived from the original on 2 June 2008. http://web.archive.org/web/20080602222237/http://www2.nen.nl/nen/servlet/dispatcher.Dispatcher?id=253848&parentid=000009.  (Dutch)
16. ^ "Trinidad and Tobago Bureau of Standards votes approval of DIS29500". Trinidad and Tobago Computer Society. 22 March 2008. http://ttcs.wordpress.com/2008/03/22/trinidad-and-tobago-bureau-of-standards-votes-approval-of-dis29500/. 
17. ^ "Vote Tally for INCITSLB2558". International Committee on Information Technology Standards. http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=vote&committee=INCITS&ballot_id=2558. ^{[dead link]}