This takes the cake. Alex Brown has just admitted on his Griffin Brown blog and further to ZDNET UK's Peter Judge that Microsoft Office 2007 has failed two OOXML conformance tests he ran. First ZDNET:
In a blog posting this week, Alex Brown, revealed that Microsoft Office 2007 documents do not meet the latest specifications of the ISO OOXML draft standard.

Here's a quotation for the ages, from an Alex Brown comment on Andrew Updegrove's Standards Blog (scroll down) asking Brown if he'd agree that ODF was cleaner than OOXML:

OOXML's rejection is stated publicly; Alex Brown's attacks on ODF persist

Alex Brown recently tweeted to Microsoft's Doug Mahugh the following about OOXML:OOXML=tought [sic] fights; revealed JTC 1 procedures were rubbish. The OOXML approval was marred by procedures that were rubbish, eh? How about the result, then? Wasn't that exactly what the four appeals against adoption of OOXML stated as one basis, that the process was essentially rubbish? Were they right?

Peter Judge, over at ZDNet UK, continues to publish articles about Alex Brown’s stubborn battle against ODF, which even Alex himself considers to be analogous to “a neat house built on good foundations”.

Alex Brown, the convenor of the ISO's Office Open XML (OOXML) Ballot Resolution Meeting, has accused Microsoft of failure in its efforts to transform the document format into a genuinely open standard

Response to new disinformation from the Microsoft camp. Microsoft cheerleaders like Alex Brown and Jesper Lund Stocholm are quite deliberately misinterpreting or mis-presenting a vote related to OOXML by claiming that IBM "supports" OOXML.

Alex thinks that Microsoft has failed to fulfill crucial promises upon which the approval of OOXML was based. He concludes that unless Microsoft reverses course promptly, "the entire OOXML project is now surely heading for failure."

The convenor of the OOXML BRM pretends the appeals against his BRM don't count