The Mackerel in Moonlight

July 25, 2007

There has been a lot of discussion in forums around the world regarding the current ISO review. And the hubbub seems to be growing as the September 2^nd deadline for the technical review of the specification draws ever nearer. In a lot of the discussions I both see and hear about, I am baffled as to how much the tenor of the debate is being colored by an anti-Microsoft sentiment. I’d like to explore that a little bit.

In the discussion around Open XML, there seem to be some who have a need to paint what should be a dispassionate technical review on the merits of the specification as some sort of Armageddon-like battle, with the forces of “truth and light” lined up to face the might of “evil.” As a self-confessed political-hack-in-recovery, I have to admit this makes a very compelling story. Much like the newspapers love to show elections as photo-finish horse races, anti-Microsoft partisans have latched onto this “epic battle for justice” storyline and are hanging on for dear life.

Let’s, for the sake of argument, take one more Joe Friday-esque look at “just the facts.”

• Open XML belongs to Ecma. Microsoft does not have control over future developments of ISO DIS 29500;
  
• Microsoft freely and irrevocably turned over stewardship of its intellectual property to Ecma
  
• ISO DIS 29500 unlocks data in an incredibly powerful way that allows people, companies and governments to use their data in new and unique ways;
  

So what’s the real issue? Anyone with a pulse knows what Microsoft has been accused of in the last 10 years so it is a bit disingenuous to say that Microsoft is pulling a fast one. It is a lot more ingenuous, and perhaps ingenious, to ask “who wins if Open XML does not become an ISO standard?”

• Certainly not commercial customers or users, who would be unable to utilize an ISO standard and still benefit from custom schema, backwards compatibility and other enhanced features built into Open XML;
  
• It definitely would not be governments, who would be unable to utilize an ISO standard to maintain their archived data in a format that was designed to be compatible with the documents of today and tomorrow;
  
• And it isn’t ordinary citizens and consumers who just want to be able to communicate and not think about the how or why. There are hundreds, perhaps thousands of implementations of Open XML, including everything from Microsoft Office, to Open Office, to Apple’s new iPhone, allowing for ease of use in almost all environments and scenarios.
  

I would encourage everyone to take a look at the noise surrounding this conversation with a dispassionate eye. I think if you do, you’ll see that the opponents of DIS 29500 are very focused on some sort of a “win-lose” proposition. Id est, ISO adoption of Open XML means that Microsoft wins and the world loses. By focusing on this narrow perspective, they are polluting the technical review of an Ecma specification with anti-Microsoft bias. I prefer to look at it from this win-win perspective: If Open XML is adopted by ISO, the whole world can benefit from a robust, powerful document format and feel completely comfortable that it is being maintained by a community of interested parties, rather than a single entity.

The continued negative dialogue by anti-Microsoft partisans is only so much carping by competitors engaging in business strategy painted up to look like honest standards participation. Calling Microsoft dishonest and anti-competitive for simple participation in an international standards process dominated by IBM and others for years now is like a mackerel in moonlight; it both shines and stinks at the same time. The simple truth is that Microsoft’s participation in the international standards process is a strong demonstration of its maturation as a corporate citizen. By repudiating that, the anti-Microsoft crowd does themselves, their customers and the truth a titanic disservice.

Posted in Uncategorized