[A2k] Fwd: [ipr] South Africa the first to appeal to ISO on OOXML process

[Michelle Childs]

--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]

Michelle Childs
Head of European Affairs
  Knowledge Ecology International
www.keionline.org / www.cptech.org
Phone:+44(0)207 226 6663 ex 252
Email: michelle.childs@cptech.org





Begin forwarded message:

> From: Vera Franz <vfranz@osf-eu.org>
> Date: 27 May 2008 10:49:51 BST
> To: ipr&publicdomain <ipr@list.soros.org>
> Subject: [ipr] South Africa the first to appeal to ISO on OOXML
> process
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: 	South Africa the first to appeal to ISO on OOXML process
> Date: 	Fri, 23 May 2008 20:49:23 +0200
> From: 	Andrew Rens <andrewrens@gmail.com>
>
>
>
> South Africa is the first country to appeal to ISO on OOXML process
>
>
> The South African Standards Bureau, which is the South African
> authority
> which both deals with standards nationally but also represents South
> Africa at the International Standards Organisation
> <http://www.iso.org/iso/home.htm> (ISO) has appealed against the
> controversial process which led to OOXML (or DIS 29500 in ISOspeak)
> being designated as an ISO standard. The process has been
> controversial
> with critics charging that standard was forced through, raising
> concerns
> that ISO will become controlled by multi-national corporate interests.
>
> SABS made the appeal in a letter
> <http://www.openmalaysiablog.com/2008/05/the-south-afric.html> in
> which
> the standards body expressed South Africa's "deep concern over the
> increasing tendency of international organizations to use the JTC 1
> processes to circumvent the consensus-building process that is the
> cornerstone of the success and international acceptance of the ISO and
> IEC standards. The ability of large multi-national organization to
> influence many national bodies, with the resultant block-voting
> over-riding legitimate issues raised by other countries, is also of
> concern."
>
> The letter concludes: " we challenge the validity of a process that,
> from beginning to end, required all parties involved to analyze far
> too
> much information in far too little time, involved a BRM [Ballot
> Resolution Meeting] that did not remotely provide enough time to
> preform
> the appointed purpose of that procedure, and for which an arbitary
> time
> limitation was imposed to discuss and resolve a significant number of
> substantial responses, despite the Directives not requiring any such
> limitation as to duration."
>
> The letter can be found at: http://www.tectonic.co.za/?attachment_id=2445
>
>
> It is significant that South Africa is taking leadership on this
> issue,
> indicating a government committed to enabling innovation through open
> standards.
>
>
>
> --
> Andrew Rens
> Now blogging at www.aliquidnovi.org <http://www.aliquidnovi.org>
>
> --
> Vera Franz
> Program Manager
> Information Program
> <www.soros.org/ip>
> Open Society Foundation
> 100, Cambridge Grove
> London W6 0LE
> phone +44 20 7031 0219
> fax +44 20 7031 0247
>
>
>
>
> This message might contain confidential information and is protected
> by copyright.
> If you receive it in error, please notify us, delete it and do not
> make use of or copy it.
>
>