Afnor, the french normalization organization, officially said No with comments to OOXML today. Among the French 122 pages document, one the French demand for OOXML certification is: Converge with Open Document Format. One more official NO
Official press release from AFNOR :
(French) http://portailgroupe.afnor.fr/v3/espace-presse/communiques/2007/070903-OOXML.htm
Quick English translation :
Office formats : AFNOR proposes ISO convergence between ODF and OOXML in short term, and stabilize OOXML in long term.
Following deliberations of the meeting of the normalisation commission held on august 28 and 29, AFNOR does not close the door to ISO OfficeOpen XML. AFNOR suggests ISO to organize the convergence of ODF and OfficeOpen XML.
Thanks to numerous contributions, parties have shown the need for an quality OOXML format recognized by ISO. In the context where multiple specifications of document formats exist, French professionals who have been greatly involved in the expertise, have shown that a convergence between OOXML and ODF - already a norm - was possible, towards a unique document format norm, which can be revised.
On the grounds that this position was largely shared, and despite the lack of unanimous position on the subject at the end of those meetings in regards to the best solution for both short term and long term, AFNOR proposes ISO to :
- restructure the ECMA standard in 2 pieces, making a distinction between :
— on the one hand, a core of essential functionalities, easy to implement (OOXML-core)
— on the other hand, all annex functionalities necessary for compatibility reasons with the existing base of documents, grouped in a set called (OOXML-extensions)
- take in account a large set of technical comments that were provided to make OOXML an ISO document of the best technical quality and readability possible
- promote ISO/TS status ("technical specification") available 3 years for OOXML
- put in place a convergence process between ISO/IEC 26300 and the core of OOXML, and for that matter ensure from now on the maintenance and revisions of ISO/IEC 26300 and ISO/TS OOXML (if OOXML is adopted after said restructuration), to obtain once the convergence is achieved, a unique norm that is the most universal possible, where future evolutions are agreed upon at ISO and not at the level of such individual actors or groups.
In order to reach that goal, and allow the convergence process to succeed, AFNOR is therefore conducted to Not accept as is the proposed ECMA standard. Technically speaking, AFNOR votes negatively to the project as presented. This negative vote is however filed with comments that AFNOR wants to be taken into account in order to reconsider his position.
AFNOR is poised to promote this position internationally, forwards to the next step in February where comments from all countries will be gathered and studied.
On august 28 and 29, the normalisation commission AFNOR FDR (revisable document formats) has completed 5 intense months of work at AFNOR between all parties concerned by the emergence of norms in office document formats : software vendors, users, administrations, local collectivies.
AFNOR is the French member of ISO.
-Stephane Rodriguez
An interesting chart summarizing the AFNOR position on OOXML :
(from Ars Aperta, who were working with AFNOR on the subject all this time)
-Stephane Rodriguez
It's so nice to read the solid, high quality work by France, Norway, New Zealand and a few others. They have spent considerable effort to review this huge standard in a short time and point out to ISO, ECMA and Microsoft exactly what is wrong with it, and even suggest how to fix it from the ground up, not just throw in some small fixes here and there. These very well motivated "no" votes should really make the plain "yes" voters feel more than a bit sheepish. How come they did not see any of those problems? I would suspect they did not bother to look, did not know where or how to look, or were asked not to look, because I don't think that it's just a case of the document markup experts from France, Norway and New Zealand being more picky than experts elsewhere.
The "no" votes are now amounting to a significant portion of the total votes, and the large amount of expertly written comments will be very difficult to ignore, or dismiss as unimportant or small details which are easily fixed by simple editing. This looks very promising for the cause of the "no" side, as there is now considerable agreement from NBs worldwide that OOXML is indeed broken by design and needs a big overhaul to work.
Merci les Français. Puisse cette position durer jusqu'en Février!
Thank you French guys. I hope this will continu until february!
Sorry it's only in french.
Un belle analyse du "non avec commentaire" de l'Afnor :
http://www.cio-online.com/actualites/lire-openxml-microsoft-en-route-pour-canossa-773-page-1.html
««« La position de la France, défendue par l'Afnor, est, de ce point de vue, particulièrement argumentée et, sous le couvert de ménager la chèvre et le choux, démonte le projet initial de Microsoft et vise à forcer l'éditeur américain à rentrer dans le rang de l'industrialisation. »»»
A bad translation :
The France position, defended by AFNOR, from this point of view, particularly argued and, under cover of neutrality, dismounts the preliminary draft of Microsoft and aims to force the American editor to return in the road of industrialization.
I specially like the last sentence « la violence de la réaction de l'éditeur est à la hauteur de l'affront » which means something like "the strong microsoft reply is as high as the afnor's offence". It seems Afnor has said "No" despite the majority of members voted "Yes". According to Afnor, it was the only way to take in account all the comments. That's the reason why Microsoft is so angry against Afnor.
In OOXML-Core, Afnor recommends :
- only one implementation for each feature (no "either VML or WMF or EMF or whatever else")
- only ISO standards (date formated like "YYYY-MM-DD", SVG drawings, standard units metric, …)
- no binary attachments
- …
Afnor Recommends to put the "bad" stuff in the OOXML-Extensions : VML, binary attachments…
I like this. However, I'm not sure at all Microsoft will follow this comments…
