I hadn't expected to be able to post anything more today, but when you're camped at 8,000 feet you can sometimes surprise yourself with a signal (uh, when on vacation that's not all good).
Be that as it may, this just in: China has unanimously voted "no, with comments" on OOXML. As I had noted in an earlier blog entry, China had been signalling some displeasure with Microsoft and OOXML in recent weeks, via Xinhua, the official government news agency, so this is not totally a surprise. If you can read Mandarin, the result was revealed here. I am told by a trusted source, that Co-Creative.org, an organization promoting open source made the disclosure, and that he confirmed the news with Mr. Ni Guangnan, of the fellowship of China Academy of Engineering, as source quoted in the earlier Xinhua stories.
There are many interesting aspects to the story, not only as it relates to China’s ambitions in office productivity suites, but also as it figures into their substantial and ongoing standards strategy. You can read more about that strategy in this issue of the Consortium Standards Bulletin (now called Standards Today).
It’s also interesting in that a large degree of public participation figured into the decision. For example, there is this on-line poll site, qwhich allows anyone to log on to indicate how they thought China should vote on OOXML. As of this moment, the voting was running 92.31% (8294 out of 8985 votes cast) against approval.
I’ll continue to post publishable results as I hear of them – assuming I can get a connection.
For further blog entries on ODF and OOXML, click here
subscribe to the free Consortium Standards Bulletin
[begin_joke]
…how long before Microsoft issues a press release, accusing those who oppose OOXML as being part of a Communist plot?
[end_joke]
Didn’t Gates or Ballmer once say that open source smacked of communism, or something to that effect?
I guess it’s hard to come up with a joke about the situaiton that doesn’t have an element of truth. Amazing situation.
– Andy
Yes, Gates said it was "like communism" and Jim Allchin said it was unamerican. It smacks them in the face several years later when they try to argue that they ‘love’ open source (as in, we have blocks of code that run with SharePoint, SQL Server, XAML, and Windows).
Speaking of open standards, I urge you to read the following if you have not. http://news.com.com/Bill+Gates+and+other+communists/2010-1071_3-5576230.html
—
http://Schestowitz.com
Liar. (but we’ve come to expect this).The vote has not happened.
I’m craig, and I’ll register in a couple of minutes.
Here’s a link that makes the thing clearer.
64.233.179.104/translate_c
It’s pretty clear that China voted, "no."
I hope this helps.
craig (groklaw fan)
‘Sorry. Get google to translate. (That part didn’t come through.)
Here’s a sample.
3, China voted against the reasons OOXML
China is the International Standards Organization ISO members of China’s votes in a pivotal role (basic membership, as long as there are 11 votes against it could be achieved veto).
We stand in the ISO OOXML voted against.
For example, some experts believe, in accordance with the requirements of ISO as an international standard must meet certain criteria, including : accuracy, versatility, optimizing the rules, from all the essentials, curing the best technology experience, interoperability, portability, culture and language adaptability, etc., whereas Analysis shows that Microsoft OOXML not meet these requirements, it does not fit international standards and should be rejected. ： We returned to China is particularly important some of the reasons are as follows :
1.OOXML only supports a Windows platform
O。 OOXML not in Linux and other non-Windows platform for example, it has become the international standard, will enhance the Windows operating system monopoly, which would seriously jeopardize the future of domestic operating system.
2.OOXML contain a large number of private standards and Microsoft technology
The document will OOXML 6000 (UOF only 554), contains a number of Microsoft’s private standards and technology, to the exclusion of existing relevant international standards, which constitute the other vendors insurmountable technical barriers, and intellectual property risks (People still remember that Microsoft recently threatened Linux violated Microsoft 235 patents).
3.OOXML Microsoft Office 2007 only a single product to achieve its full functionality
OOXML is basically based on the Microsoft Office 2007 to formulate a product of technical indicators, and no other products can achieve its full functionality. So OOXML with ODF, UOF converter, or OOXML with ODF, UOF interoperability is not so in other words, other products compatible OOXML up only a part. Therefore, if OOXML become an international standard, Microsoft Office strengthened in the field of office software monopoly status.
4.OOXML culture and language adaptability
OOXML for cultural and linguistic enough support for the Chinese far less support UOF and not suitable for Chinese applications.
The other hand, ODF UOF and more mature, there are a number of operating system platforms to support multiple products, using existing relevant international standards, more suited to China’s demand, has been the world’s most recognized and enterprises, so China should support ODF and UOF integration, as opposed to OOMXL international standards.
craig again
Thanks for the help and the added information, Craig. Through Thursday of this week I’ve only got occasional access to the Internet, so the assistance is appreciated.
– Andy