The BACnetter's have pulled out of oBIX.

They took their ball and went home crying....

March 2005 Consulting/Specifying Engineer there is an article entitled Bullish on Bacnet. In it they make this specific observation on the following question:

CSE: Why are you now pursuing you own XML standard apart from the efforts of oBIX (Open Building Information Exchange)?

Answers: We had been working on XML stuff for quite a while, but strictly in the context of BACnet. (next) We also wanted something that could hold up to the ANSI and ISO process and, frankly, we felt oBIX didn't have the standard's arm to do that. At the same time, we were also concerned about the question of input. In other words, who was going to contribute? Finally, we also felt we did a big chunk of the development work and didn't feel we were getting appropriate representation. But I think the bottom line was that we were afraid it might be a return to a failed architecture.

Cry, cry, cry. "we did a big chunk or the development... didn't feel we were getting proper represenatation." Sniffle, cry, cry, cry some more.

BACnet is getting the pinch from LON, DALI, and oBIX. BACnet was made initially for Supervisory data transfer. Which is probably why the crying BACnetter's don't complain much about DALI as it's not very scaleable. LON with oBIX is a different story...

The ASHRAE BACnetter's should just stop the propaganda and promote standards, not their business agenda.