Debat soal Standar ISO OOXML: Bagaimana Posisi Indonesia?

Menarik sekali debat sengit soal Penetapan OOXML (Open Office XML)sebagai Standard ISO, menandingi standar ODF (Open Document Format) yang telah cukup lama dan secara luas dipakai Masyarakat Internasional.

OOXML adalah usulan Standar ISO dari Microsoft untuk penyimpanan dokumen elektronik, yang berbeda dengan Standar ISO ODF yang telah lama dipakai Masyarakat dunia. File-file yang disimpan dalam Format OOXML menjadi tidak kompatibel dengan file-file binary yang biasa disimpan dalam format ODF. Contohnya adalah format MS Office 97-2003 .DOC kompatibel dengan format .ODT dari Open Office (Open Source Software).

Sedangkan Format Baru MS Office 2007 berbasis OOXML dengan File Extension .DOCX tidak kompatibel dengan Format Binary .ODT, dan harus ada proses translasi yang sulit. Software MS Office 97-2003 pun tidak bisa membuka File MS Office 2007 dengan file extension DOCX tersebut. Cukup aneh, mengapa sama-sama dari MS Office tidak saling bisa dibuka! Tentu ada strategi bisnis mereka tertentu. Silahkan Anda sekalian memikirkannya.

Proses penetapaon OOXML sebagai Standar ISO yang ber-larut-larut ini disebabkan adanya kejanggalan-kejanggalan dalam proses ini, ketidak-biasaan, sebagaimana diungkapkan dalam Tanggapan yang terlampir dibawah ini, oleh masyarakat yang peduli akan Standar Internasional.

Tangapan-tanggapan ini muncul setelah ada sebuah artikel dari Rob Enderle, seorang Konsultan Teknologi dengan artikelnya yang berjudul: " Would It Matter if Microsoft Didn’t Cheat with OOXML Approval?" di URL: http://www.itbusinessedge.com/
Masyarakat meng-kritik Rob Enderle secara pedas, karena Ia dikenal sebagai konsultan yang selalu memihak Software Proprietary dengan komentarnya antara lain:
----------
Enderle has been critical of Apple Computer and Linux, as well as Unix and the open source/free software movements in general. In particular, he has described Linux as a “free-software scam,”[2] and he has compared some Linux advocates to terrorists, predicting that “one of them — or perhaps a group of them — will go too far at some point and do significant damage to the open-source movement, the ongoing litigation with SCO or their employers.”[3] Nevertheless, Enderle was a featured speaker at the Desktop Linux Summit 2006.
----------

Berikut ini adalah daftar kejanggalan-kejanggalan dalam proses Penetapan OOXML sebagai Standar ISO baru, sbb:

1. Banyak negara-negara baru yang biasanya tidak ikut2an Voting di ISO mendadak jadi membela OOXML.
2. Ada kejanggalan-kejanggalan dalam Voting Standar ISO ditingkat Nasional di Swedia, Norwegia, Polandia, Jerman dan Perancis, sehingga karena dead-lock, mereka akhirnya memilih Abstain!
3. Kejanggalan-kejanggalan proses Voting lainnya yang mencurigakan, sebagaimana diuraikan terlampir.

Kami tidak tahu/tidak pernah ikut serta dalam Proses Voting di Tingkat Nasional Indonesia. Oleh karena itu kami harapkan ada yang dapat menjelaskan bagaimana proses itu terjadi di Indonesia, dan apakah Posisi Indonesia saat ini untuk Voting Usulan Standar baru OOXML ini. Kami harapkan ada yang dapat memberikan penjelasan secara transparan bagi masyarakat Indonesia pada umumnya, sebab pilihan penetapan Standar ISO ini akan sangat berpengaruh secara teknis dan ekonomis bagai masyarakat Indonesia. Contohnya, bila standar yang dipilih adalah standar yang tidak kompatibel dengan Standar ISO yang ada, dampaknya bisa menambah Investasi baru Software tertentu untuk bisa membuka File baru tersebut.

Silahkan kawan-kawan memberikan tanggapan, penjelasan atau saran-saran yang positif bagi kemajuan bangsa dan negara.

Wassalam,
S Roestam
-----------------TANGGAPAN USUL STANDAR OOXML DARI LUAR NEGERI-----------------------



# Comment by Andy — April 3, 2008 at 2:45 pm

People are smart. When you breach the rules people shout. The government investigation has little significance. It is always difficult to prove “corruption” without raids and I guess that no real criminal corruption was involved. Just that the ISO process was compromised. A social contract was broken.

“If the people deciding have no more connection to the facts than the folks rendering their opinions on OOXML, we are either all dead or on a path to another Dark Ages.”

People are smart. People remember. People fight back.
# Comment by Michael — April 3, 2008 at 5:30 pm

Hello? There is more evidence of impropriety in the current vote that you didn’t mention.

You forgot to mention how there were so many irregularities in the Swedish vote that their National Body had to Abstain (during the first vote) and was not able to recover in time for the second vote (thus maintaining their Abstention).

You forgot to mention that many of the voting P- countries (in the first and second vote) joined with the sole purpose of voting for OOXML - and that these countries (1) have little interest in setting standards, (2) rank as the most corrupt nations on the planet, and (3) have halted work on other ISO standards because of their inactivity.

There is evidence of impropriety in the Norwegian vote. The technical committee chair for Norway’s National body said it himself. (FYI, the letter from the Norwegian National Body stating that there were no irregularities was with respect to the first vote, not to the second vote.) The NB’s most recent statement that their vote was really, really, a YES, does not negate the accusation of irregularities because the statement comes from the people accused of the irregularities in the first place. Duh.

Should I continue with Poland and Germany, or are you deaf?
# Comment by Kenneth — April 3, 2008 at 8:55 pm

I think some issues are being confused in the article. For instance, the question of whether OOXML is better or worse than ODF is different than the question of whether OOXML should be an ISO standard. Lots of people may find ODF unacceptable for their needs. Many people may find OOXML useful. But that doesn’t mean OOXML should be an ISO standard.

An ISO standard should allow for implementation cross platform from different vendors - without having to beg for more information from Microsoft. An ISO standard should be able to get dates right. This is just the tip of the iceberg for why OOXML should not become an ISO standard. These reasons to not accept OOXML as an ISO standard would still exist even if ODF didn’t.

The author says, “Never before have I seen a vendor that has the existing standard for anything challenged in this fashion. ” That vendor is MS. That makes OOXML the referenced “existing standard”? Besides the recent ISO stamp of approval, I don’t think OOXML could be considered “an existing standard.” I work in a document-heavy industry and I don’t know anyone who saves documents in OOXML. The few Word 2007 users I know of all save their documents in the binary .doc format.

To say “Microsoft doesn’t have the power,” is a bit nieve.
Microsoft showed in Sweden how easy it was to “turn out the vote” from your “gold partners.” The only unfortunate thing (for Microsoft) in Sweden is that they were caught. (Remember that email from Microsoft offering special “incentives” to partners to vote? Of course, Microsoft claimed that was an unfortunate exception.) Why is it that corrupt countries suddenly signed up to vote? Do you think Microsoft pursuaded them somehow?

With the way Microsoft gamed ths system - which is no secret, just read the press - most people (even MS fans) would probably say that Microsoft “cheated.” MS certainly didn’t play by the spirit of the rules. MS may have even broken the law in some instances and may have abused their monopoly power.
# Comment by Foo Bar — April 4, 2008 at 5:00 pm

“if we agree that Microsoft taking away all choice is wrong, why would we also not agree that making the only choice ODF was equally wrong?”

You are so naive, Rob… (*)

Microsoft is not being forced to use ODF. They can use OOXML if they want.

But why don’t they give their customers the ODF choice? That’s because, once we have a truly open standard, people will have choice in tha application arena: MS Office, OpenOffice, you name it.

So, Microsoft is pushing their own file format, which is not designed to be interoperable, but just to pretend some openness.

(*) In fact, if you look for Rob Enderle’s past record on open source software, you’ll find that he described Linux as a “free-software scam,” has compared some Linux advocates to terrorists, and predicted that SCO would win… (yes, SCO, the company now in bankrupcy.)
# Comment by Foo Bar — April 4, 2008 at 5:01 pm

Oh, I just found this mini-resume on Wikipedia:

, is a consultant, writer, and widely quoted technical and legal analyst in the information technology industry. Microsoft, Advanced Micro Devices, the SCO Group, IBM, Hewlett-Packard, and Dell are (or have been) among his clients.[1]

Enderle has been critical of Apple Computer and Linux, as well as Unix and the open source/free software movements in general. In particular, he has described Linux as a “free-software scam,”[2] and he has compared some Linux advocates to terrorists, predicting that “one of them — or perhaps a group of them — will go too far at some point and do significant damage to the open-source movement, the ongoing litigation with SCO or their employers.”[3] Nevertheless, Enderle was a featured speaker at the Desktop Linux Summit 2006.[4]

Before founding the Enderle Group, Enderle was a founding analyst at Giga Information Group (acquired by Forrester Research), Dataquest (acquired by Gartner) [5], IBM, ROLM (acquired by IBM), and The Walt Disney Company.

Rob Enderle has been a vocal commentator in the ongoing high-def format war writing for Digital Trends. [6] His credibility has been publicly called into question on the topic, being charged with claiming to be an independent observer while on the payroll of Toshiba. [7]

–

And, now, he’s defending OOXML…
# Comment by Dave — April 5, 2008 at 4:20 pm

Is this that same Rob who opined “The war is over and HD-DVD won” last January. The same Rob that crowed about the greatness of Vista.

Are you one of those analysts who’s business model is selling out? Microsoft’s words not mine.
# Comment by Bruce Wolfe — April 8, 2008 at 1:03 pm

You sound like a Microsoft apologist. Time to get with the program and support alternatives. Innovation and change is the only way technology grows, and not supporting the same old thing that continues to control the market. Forget what Durusau says. ODF would eventually create some alternative that the rest of us non-MS users would use thus creating healthy competition and a true open-source format.