[Fwd: Ecma responses to ISO]

[Bill Sconce]

On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 13:15:33 -0500
"Jon 'maddog' Hall" <maddog at li.org> wrote:

md>     The document can be accessed at
md>        http://www.computerworld.com/pdfs/Ecma.pdf.
md>     Best Regards,
md> Jomar

Indeed.  Dates off?  No problem:
4  OpenXML supports two systems for converting numbers to their date format representations:
5     1. The 1900 date base system represents the technical decisions, including technical errors, of a prominent
6         early spreadsheet implementation, namely, Lotus 1-2-3TM. This representation provides legacy
7         compatibility.
8     2. The 1904 date base system that correctly reflects Gregorian calendar dates.
9  thus OpenXML does not contradict ISO 8601 or the Gregorian calendar.
10 Although OpenXML 's SpreadsheetML might support dates in a range smaller than that permitted by ISO 8601,
11 Ecma does not see that this is a contradiction of that standard.

(page 15 of the PDF, line numbers/long lines left intact)

There are lots of issues (the issue of dates just being my favorite)
and Ecma seems to take the position that they are small ("technical")
hurdles to be overcome by discussion.


md> It seems like the "fast track" has failed and that it will now go
md> through a longer review process.

Don't we wish.

1 4. Conclusion
2 Ecma wishes to thank the NBs for their efforts during this 30-day review period, and looks forward to working
3 further with them in an effort to resolve any technical concerns that may arise from the 5-month ballot of the
4 Fast Track.

(page 28 of the PDF)

The 5-month ballot period apparently *is* the fast track.

md> for something as important as XML we might want to keep an eye
md> on this.

OH yes.

-Bill

_____________________________________________________________
More reading:
    Andy Updegrove's "Standards Blog":
        http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/

    A description of the process, with a chart (in French):
        http://www.standarmedia.com/std/acc_det.asp?Ids=1A4&Ref=702&Page=1&lang=French
        
    Groklaw last Saturday on the Ecma approval (and with a translation
    of the above description, without the chart):
        http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2007030308154032
    
    A good (one of many) articles on how the "standards process"
    asks the wrong questions:
        http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/node/2110