[LINK] ISO and computing standards

[Glen Turner]

There are three ways to develop an ISO computing standard. ISO
can develop it itself, via the WG1 working group; a Publicly-
Available Specification (PAS) can be submitted and then approved
by WG1; or a standard from another standards body can be adopted --
this is called the Fast Track.

Most standards bodies don't bother to submit to the Fast Track,
partly because they see ISO as a competitor. But mainly because
of the misuse of the Fast Track by ECMA International, a body
which was once the European Computer Manufacturers' Association.
Since there are no longer any European computer manufacturers,
ECMA has re-purposed itself in providing a path for vendors to
make their specifications into ISO standards.

In the past year Microsoft submitted a poor specification of
its Office 2007 document formats to ECMA International (ECMA 376),
and then to the ISO Fast Track (ISO draft 29500). This was accompanied
by a coordinated lobbying effort, one part of which was to sign up
countries to vote for the Microsoft specifications acceptance as an
international standard.

Those signed-up (or Participating, or simply P) country members
are doing no other work in WG1, and this has entirely stalled
the working group.

With this background, you can now understand the significance
of the following e-mail.


From: Russell Ossendryver <worldlabel at gmail.com>
Date: Dec 5, 2007 1:40 PM
Subject: [odf-discuss] ISO Working Group Status Report from Convenor,
ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34 WG1
To: ODF Discussion List <odf-discuss at opendocumentfellowship.com>

The second half of 2007 has been an extremely trying time for WG1. I
am more than a little glad my 3 year term is up, and must commiserate
with my successor on taking over an almost impossible task.

WG1 has been struggling against the rules laid down ISO for a number
of years, trying to prepare a complex multipart standard that needs to
take account of work being done in OASIS, W3C and IETF within the
extremely limited timescales laid down by ISO for completion of
standards. While these rules make sense when you have a single
standard, or sufficient members to multi-task, they make it impossible
for a small group to produce a multipart standard. WG1 have frequently
had to ask for extensions to our time limits, and must continue to do
so while trying to produce an integrated suite of standards.

This year WG1 have had another major development that has made it
almost impossible to continue with our work within ISO. The influx of
P members whose only interest is the fast-tracking of ECMA 376 as ISO
29500 has led to the failure of a number of key ballots. Though P
members are required to vote, 50% of our current members, and some 66%
of our new members, blatantly ignore this rule despite weekly email
reminders and reminders on our website. As ISO require at least 50% of
P members to vote before they start to count the votes we have had to
reballot standards that should have been passed and completed their
publication stages at Kyoto. This delay will mean that these standards
will appear on the list of WG1 standards that have not been produced
within the time limits set by ISO, despite our best efforts.

Unless ISO tightens up on its rules, and removes or demotes, P members
who do not vote as required by ISO rules I would recommend my
successor that it is perhaps time to pass WG1's outstanding standards
over to OASIS, where they can get approval in less than a year and
then do a PAS submission to ISO, which will get a lot more attention
and be approved much faster than standards currently can be within
WG1. The disparity of rules for PAS, Fast-Track and ISO committee
generated standards is fast making ISO a laughing stock in IT circles.
The days of open standards development are fast disappearing. Instead
we are getting "standardization by corporation", something I have been
fighting against for the 20 years I have served on ISO committees. I
am glad to be retiring before the situation becomes impossible. I wish
my colleagues every success for their future efforts, which I
sincerely hope will not prove to be as wasted as I fear they could be.

Martin Bryan
Convenor, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34 WG1

http://www.jtc1sc34.org/repository/0940.htm

-- 
Glen Turner   <http://www.gdt.id.au/~gdt/>
Tel: 0416 295 857 or +61 416 295 857