Confirmation by ISO (finally!): If you have comments you want to get resolved, you must vote "CONDITIONED NO". So many members of national Standard Committees who spent a hard time to debug the Open XML specification were deceived. They were told a "Yes with Comments" would ensure that their comments would be considered by the ISO. ECMA added to the confusion that they would consider all comments but ECMA has nothing to do with the standard anymore. In fact as FFII insisted a "Yes with comments" is a YES to the current broken ECMA-submitted specification with a kind of Christmas card attached. From the bylaws it is evident that "comments" to an approval vote are just editorial, but all comments need to be submitted as a "CONDITIONEDl NO". When you want your comments to get considered your nation has to vote "DISAPPROVAL WITH COMMENTS". If you thought otherwise ask your unbiased national Standards Committee that voted "approval with comments". I am sure they would you explain you the bylaws.
"9.8 Votes on Fast-track DISs
The period for fast-track DIS (or DAM) voting shall be six months,
consistin of a 30-day JTC1 National Body review period followed by a
five-month ballot period. NMs may reply in one of the following ways:
-Approval of the technical content of the DIS as presented (editorial or
other comments may be appended);
-Disapproval of the DIS (or DAM) for technical reasons to be stated, with
proposals for changes that would make the document acceptable (acceptance
of these proposals shall be referred to the NM concerned for confirmation
that the vote can be changed to approval);
-Abstention (see 9.12).
Note: Conditional approval should be submitted as a disapproval vote.
The criteria for approval are given in 9.6. If these criteria are not met
initially but are subsequently met at the conclusion of ballot resolution
in accordance with 13.9, the DIS (or DA) is approved."
ISO ANSWER to Uruguay inquiry
Apart of the stablished in the proceeding that is refered, it was made a formal question directly to the Technical Program Manager of the Central
Office at ISO at Geneva assigned to the project ISO/IEC FDISK 29500. Mr. Brannon communicated via telephone with UNIT (Uruguayan NB) to answer the doubts that were addressed regarding the treatment of the comments in the alternatives of approval or dissaproval. His answer via e-mail is what is shown here:
UNIT: Our national mirror commitee has identified many comments to this DIS
and we have some doubts in how the comments will be processed by the WG
mentioned in 4.
Our questions are
1- Is it valid to send an approval vote with technical comments? In this
case, could we be sure that the comments will be considered by the WG
before the counting of votes mentioned in 5
Mr. Brannon: ALL COMMENTS WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THE BALLOT RESOLUTION
MEETING. YOU MAY SUBMIT COMMENTS WITH AN APPROVAL VOTE THAT ALSO MAY BE
TECHNICAL BUT YOU ARE NOT INSISTNG THEY ARE ACCEPTED AS YOU HAVE ACCEPTED
THE TEXT IN VOTING APPROVAL
UNIT: 2- Is it valid to send a "disapproval vote", which could change to
"approval" during the counting of votes mentioned in 5 if the comments
are considered by the WG (conditoned vote).
Mr Brannon: YES IF IT IS A CONDITIONAL VOTE YOU MUST VOTE DISAPPOVAL WITH
TECHNICAL COMMENTS AND INDICATE PROPOSALS FOR CHANGE THAT WOULD MAKE THE
DOCUMENT ACCEPTABLE AND A CHANGE OF VOTE TO APPROVAL.
We will appreciate very much your prompt reply."