Sorry, we couldn't find any pages containing "ooxml iso standard" in Resources . How ever the following results are found in other sections on ZDNet.co.uk
OOXML standard will tarnish ISO
Blog Given all that, why do I think ISO will rubber-stamp the unfinished and controversial standard, OOXML? Some countries may have changed their votes since the last meeting, and forgotten to mention it, but the consensus amongst OOXML watchers is that...
[March 31, 2008, 9:27]
OOXML standard will tarnish ISO
Blog Comment `The point is that ISO believes in what it does. It works this way, because it is convinced this is the best way to make standards. It will say that it is above grubby controversies, while actually wallowing in a spurious purity which it achieves...
[April 3, 2008, 12:42]
OOXML officially an ISO standard!
Blog Comment I expect the next vote will be to replace ODF with OOXML so we can truly have a standard.
[April 2, 2008, 0:12]
OOXML officially an ISO standard!
Blog Well - it's as official as we're going to get it before ISO makes its public announcement tomorrow. According to a Microsoft press release, the standard won support from 75 percent of the P (participating) Members, ahead of the 66.7 percent...
[April 2, 2008, 10:03]
ISO rejects Microsoft OOXML
Talkback I would expect, that by February, enough money will be paid, or enough threats made, for OOXML to become an open, proprietary standard. It is not Microsoft''s behavior to not get it's way.
[September 6, 2007, 14:08]
But OOXML is a non-standard
Talkback The problem is that OOXML is a non-standard. That is the only purpose and function of OOXML, and the only reason why Microsoft hasn't included an ODF filter in MS Offife is that ODF really is a standard, and one that allows competing vendors to...
[April 15, 2008, 19:35]
Micrsoft committed to ISO version of OOXML
Talkback I think it is interesting that Sun/OOo and IBM are not going for the international ISO standard but to a version they refused to submit to ISO. Microsoft has already in an open letter committed to supporting the upcoming ISO/IEC version (which is...
[May 22, 2008, 11:36]
ISO says no to OOXML appeals
Blog OOXML is now an ISO standard - or at least it will be when it finally gets published "within the next few weeks on completion of final processing of the document, and subject to no further appeals against the decision".
[August 16, 2008, 14:15]
OOXML clears ISO voting
Blog An official announcement is awaited, but it seems certain now that Microsoft's OOXML specification has made its way through the ISO fasttrack process, albeit with many serious concerns over the way in which the voting unfolded.
[March 30, 2008, 11:48]
OOXML: ISO says 'No' for now
Blog According to ISO, the OOXML specification received 53 percent positive votes, while it failed narrowly with the negative votes, receiving 26 percent. Microsoft Office Open XML has failed to gain enough votes to become an ISO standard, according to...
[September 5, 2007, 10:18]
Brazil appeals ISO ratification of OOXML
News In a letter to ISO/IEC Joint Technical Committee 1 on Thursday, Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas (ABNT), the ISO national body representing Brazil, filed an appeal against the approval of Office Open XML (OOXML) as an International...
[May 30, 2008, 15:03]
Google welcomes ISO decision on OOXML
Blog Search and advertising giant Google has welcomed the ISO decision to not approve the fast track of Office Open XML (OOXML) proposed standard DIS 29500 (ECMA 376) at this time. Our engineers conducted an independent analysis of the OOXML...
[September 18, 2007, 17:16]
Microsoft's OOXML limps through ISO meeting
News The Microsoft-created specification OOXML is struggling to achieve the two-thirds majority backing of ISO members in order for it to become a recognised standard, the aftermath of a high-profile meeting has revealed.
[March 4, 2008, 15:21]
ISO offers to take on ODF maintenance
News The international standards body ISO has offered to help maintain the ODF document standard alongside its work on the rival Microsoft-originated OOXML specification, saying its creator Oasis is not dealing with defect reports quickly enough.
[October 7, 2008, 8:34]
Brazil says 'no' to Office Open XML
News Microsoft is pushing for the Office Open XML (OOXML) document standard to be fast tracked for ISO accreditation. Microsoft wants OOXML to be accepted as an ISO standard. However, the Brazilian Technical Standards Organization (ABNT), which is one...
[August 24, 2007, 16:35]
who is lobbying????
Talkback 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. IBM has been lobbying fiercely against OOXML even before Microsoft came up with...
[September 4, 2007, 8:07]
Actually MS Office 2007 complies with official Ecma standard
Talkback Soon there might be a new version of ISO OOXML and that is then likely to become the new Ecma 376 version as well. Also the current changes planned for v1.2 of ODF are MUCH MUCH MUCH more drastic and complex changes to the format than the total of...
[February 28, 2008, 17:43]
ODF, The Big Picture
Talkback I don't think many in this discussion were cheering the virtues of OOXML as an ISO/IEC standard. You make a valid point in that ODF meets this criteria more so than MS-OOXML but let us not lose sight of the forest through the trees and turn a...
[March 2, 2008, 17:39]
Microsoft presses on regardless with OOXML SDK
Blog However, the OOXML kit which is on its way could cause confusion, as it won't meet the standard being considered at ISO. Microsoft will have a beta version of the OOXML SDK next month, and a 1.0 release in May, but that won't include the changes...
[March 13, 2008, 10:27]
The ISO would disagree
Talkback Until Microsoft hijacked the ISO approval process to favour OOXML, ODF was the recognised standard. For more information about the issues around ODF/OOXML, please follow the link provided by Chris Rankin - http://www.noooxml.org/argu-brief
[April 17, 2008, 10:31]
Please check your query for spelling errors, try again using a less specific term, or widen your search to include other site sections.
