No, it is not the Danish Standards body but OSL.dk that complains about OOXML standardization. Morten Kjærsgaard from OSL has filed a complaint directed to the ISO Vice Jacob Holmblad. Holmblad is also managing director of Dansk Standard. The official complaints of standards bodies such as South Africa, India and Brazil to ISO are as far as I know without precedence in the consensus driven world of international standardization. There were some discussions whether ISO can accept complaints which were not registered correctly according to fresh rules (note: ISO does not accept the common private law standards regarding formal acception of letters but invents its own rules on the fly, exactly specifying who needs to be notified.). IDG wrote:
"The Brazillian appeal was not lodged in the correct procedure — it was not send to the CEOs of the two organizations — but nonetheless it has been received," Buck said, adding that it will be treated in the same way as the Indian and South African appeals.
It is insightful that ISO gratefully announced to accept complaints sent to less than all of the predefined persons, where the "misconduct" of the standard bodies clearly demonstrates that the rules were made as chicanery. No wonder as ISO also accepts the formal delays in the publication of the OOXML specification, an infringement of its directives.
Sure there was confusion regarding the deadline for complaints again. Some sources inside the standard bodies spoke of second of June. So the bitter irony of the complaint process is that it reflects why many of the procedural issues (deadline confusion, new formality requirements) we observed with OOXML standardization are business as usual for ISO. It seems to be common that standard bodies are not fully aware of these formalities which grants ISO the power to eventually deny a request on matters of formality rather than substance. It ensures that every body is at ISO's mercy.
The amicus letter of the Brancheforening for Open Source Leverandører i Danmark hints that more national participants might be very upset about the standardisation procedure. In Germany a national procedural complaint by a participant of the Committee was already voted down by DIN. We might find more stakeholders worth to listen to.