Microsoft has been severely criticised by an influential member of the Open Source Initiative over the way it has pursued ISO certification for the Office Open XML specification.
Eric S Raymond, a founding member of the Open Source Initiative (OSI), labelled Microsoft's behaviour in pushing Office Open XML (OOXML) for fast track ISO certification as "egregious", and said that he was almost ready to recommend that Microsoft not receive approval from the OSI for the Microsoft Permissive License.
The OSI are the "stewards of the Open Source Definition (OSD)", and review and approve licences as OSD compliant. Microsoft on 10 August submitted the Microsoft Permissive License for OSI approval. The OSD is the most widely accepted set of criteria in the IT industry for classifying software as open source.
Raymond said that OSI's official position is that "OSI will treat any licences submitted by Microsoft strictly on their merits, without fear or favour. That remains OSI's position". However, Raymond said that his "resolve is being sorely tested", because "Microsoft's behaviour in the last few months with respect to OOXML has been egregious".
"They haven't stopped at pushing a 'standard' that is divisive, technically bogus, and an obvious tool of monopoly lock-in; they have resorted to... ballot-stuffing [and] committee-packing... to ram it through the ISO-standardisation process in ways that violate ISO's own guidelines wholesale," said Raymond.
Read this
Leader: OOXML approval system open to abuse
The Office Open XML approval process is not up to standard. Pushing ahead will be a mistake…
"Despite my previous determination, I find I'm almost ready to recommend that OSI tell Microsoft to ram its licences up one of its own orifices, even if they are technically OSD compliant, because what good is it to conform to the letter of OSD if you're raping its spirit?" said Raymond in a blog post.
Microsoft had not responded to a request for comment at the time of writing.
Talkback
1. Microsoft voted YES on both the ISO and ANSI certification of ODF and never lobbied against the standard.
2. IBM has been lobbying fiercely against OOXML even before Microsoft came up with their standard. They have been lobbying everywhere. Their goal is simple, prevent OOXML from being an ISO standard in order to have a talking point on governmental agencies and exclude Microsoft Office from being used. They clearly have a self-interest there and their position is not so altruistic in nature. Contrast this with Microsoft’s behavior on ODF. Microsoft should never had to resort on lobbying, if IBM did lobby against it. IBM is getting their bud kicked by Microsoft for so many decades now, when it comes to software and they found a new way of excluding Microsoft Office from being used. That’s the real story. I can only laugh when I hear about IBM’s interest in promoting open standards. Everybody knows this pure BS.
3. ODF had significant technical issues at the time of the vote. It was missing significant features.8 countries actually voted with comments. Most countries voted yes, because nobody really gave a damn about this standard at the time it was voted. ODF actually cruised on the ISO committee and did not receive the scrutiny that OOXXL is receiving. Again, nobody gave a damn about the standard. Preventing OOXML approval based on technical considerations is a double standard. Standards evolve in time and technical issues are being resolved in time. That’s what happened with ODF as well.
Any person, business, or government will be able to use MS Office even if OOXML does not become a standard. It isn't going to hurt M$'s bottom line. It only means that there will be a choice instead of a monopoly. ODF still makes for a better format if you want to read todays documents 75 years from now.