Bill Introduced in Minnesota to Require Use of "Open Data Formats"

Consortium Standards Bulletin ^ | 4/5/06

[steve-b]

I received an email yesterday pointing me to a bill, introduced on March 27, that would require all Executive branch agencies in the state of Minnesota to "use open standards in situations where the other requirements of a project do not make it technically impossible to do this." The text of the bill is focused specifically on "open data formats," and would amend the existing statute that establishes the authority of the Office of Enterprise Technology (OET), and the duties of the states Chief Information Officer. While the amendment does not refer to open source software, the definition of "open standards" that it contains would be conducive to open source implementations of open standards. The text of the affected sections of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 16E, showing the amendments proposed, can be found here.

The fact that such a bill has been introduced is significant in a number of respects. First, the debate over open formats will now be ongoing in two U.S. states rather than one. Second, if the bill is successful, the Minnesota CIO will be required to enforce a law requiring the use of open formats, rather than be forced to justify his or her authority to do so. Third, the size of the market share that can be won (or lost) depending upon a vendor's compliance with open standards will increase. And finally, if two states successfully adopt and implement open data format policies, other states will be more inclined to follow....

[N3WBI3]

they were 100% correct, IMO.

How so? with companies line Win zip out there? Win is a very common component of software product names why should 'dows' be any different?

lets not forget X-Windows (1984) existed before MS-Windows (1985) so if anything MS should have to give up the name...

Lets also not forget word perfect (1982) came before ms word (1983) and that MS-Office (1993) came after Ability Office (1985), Corel Office (1991), SoftMaker Office (1989), and others who used 'Office'

[softwarecreator]

"Lindows" was so obviously meant to imply "windows" and we all know it, which is a registered trademark.  It's like calling your hamburger franchise "MacDonald's" or your automotive company "Fordd".  In my opinion it was a violation.

[softwarecreator]

Thanks for the links.  I had a few minutes to briefly scan them.  Very good information.  I'll read them more in detail tonight.

[N3WBI3]

"Lindows" was so obviously meant to imply "windows" and we all know it

And MS-Windows was obviously implying a windowing environment which was already in use and called x-*windows*... Yes Linus was meant to describe a Linux based Windowing only environment.

In my opinion it was a violation.

What about MS-*Office*

[N3WBI3]

This was the crux of the problem 'windows' was a computer concept long before MS was making their product called windows. It would be like selling a car model called automobile and then suing any car maker who used that term.

[softwarecreator]

This was the crux of the problem 'windows' was a computer concept long before MS

If it was a registered trademark than MS is wrong, otherwise it is, as you said, just a concept.

[N3WBI3]

otherwise it is, as you said, just a concept.

So would it be kosher to trademark automobile and sue every car maker out there?

[softwarecreator]

Some time ago you recommended Kubuntu (spelling?).  I have an open PC and was thinking about giving it a try.  Do you know of a reliable link to the latest version for download with good install documentation?

Thanks in advance.

[N3WBI3]

http://www.kubuntu.org

[DemosCrash]

1 - Those readers only run on the Windows operating sytem.

So what. Windows comprises 90% of the worlds desktop computers. There aren't any readers for Timex-Sinclair 1000 computers. Or C64s. But that's beside the point: The fact remains that you can access the information and move it to alternate platforms, if you choose.

2 - Those aren't writers. They can't create or edit content

Again, so what. I can't write the content to Swahili. Or ancient Greek. The stumbling block is read access. You can write it in any damned format you like. Text. On the back of a matchbook. Toilet paper. Whatever.

[softwarecreator]

Thanks n3wbi3!

[Knitebane]

Kubuntu downloads

From the Kubuntu 5.10 Release Notes:

How do I install Kubuntu 5.10?

It is extremly easy to install Kubuntu 5.10. Make sure your computer can boot from a CD-ROM, insert the CD-ROM and then follow the screens.

Kubuntu is essentially Ubuntu with KDE instead of Gnome as the default window manager.

As such, installation for Ubuntu and Kubuntu are pretty much the same. So you can use the Ubuntu install guide...

Installation

[MarkL]

Does anyone else here remember GOSIP (or was is GOSSIP?), where the federal government decided that they needed to run their networks using the ISO networking protocols? To the best of my knowledge, the only company that actually implemented most of the ISO protocols was DEC, with their DECNET Level 3.

I remember fielding a call once from a guy who needed X to run over the ISO protocols, and I kept trying to tell him that to the best of my knowledge, the only way he'd ever get that to happen was for him to write the protocols himself, since X is an open protocol, but it runs on the DOD protocols (TCP/IP).

I wonder how many gazillions of dollars were wasted on that boondoggle. Heck, I believe that the programs were cancelled before the final specifications were released!

Mark

[Knitebane]

There aren't any readers for Timex-Sinclair 1000 computers. Or C64s.

Emacs, vi and LaTeX are available for both the Timex-Sinclair 1000 and the Commodore C64.

Whether anyone should is another issue.

But that's exactly the point of open formats. In 30 years you may need to get some data from your Windows XP box thats been sitting in the attic. If it's in Word .doc format your current system may not read it. Then what?

If it's in an open format, the worst case is that you would have to write (or pay someone to write) an application to read those files. With a proprietary format, that would not be possible.

[MarkL]

I can guarantee that there will be no problem with the 10 I sent in word, but 100% of the 10 I sent in ODF will be returned saying "please send in doc format".

And standards have a habit of changing from one proprietary format to another. I remember when the standard spreadsheet format was Lotus 123. And word processing was either Wordstar or Word Perfect.

Times change. So do standards. It would be nice to have open standards. Believe it or not, everyone migrating their networks to IP based networking has made things MUCH easier.

Mark

[Knitebane]

That's what happens when government gets involved in specifying how software should work at the technical level. For another example, see Ada.

Fortunately, ODF doesn't do that. It just sets out the requirements and lets each software manufacturer choose 1) whether to implement it and 2) how to do so.

[MarkL]

Fortunately, ODF doesn't do that. It just sets out the requirements and lets each software manufacturer choose 1) whether to implement it and 2) how to do so.

That's one of the best reasons for open standards. One of the best examples of this is NFS. When Sun developed it, they simply said, "here's how the data must be transfered over the wire, and here's the data format. It's up to you to make it work at your system's end." And it worked.

Mark

[Knitebane]

But like all byte sellers, they had a good deal of corporate regret over it.

See NIS+

[Beckwith]

Standards are not a technical issue at all. Standards are for people.

You would have done well to read my original lighthearted posts (44 and 102). I attempted to paint a humorous picture of the difficulties of implementing open standards for the storage and retrieval of corporate and agency data. By extension, implementing any standard, especially when initiated by mandate.

Now, there are many that view "data" in the broadest sense, meaning that anything, data, text, images, audio, etc. is data. However, the Minnesota document clearly shows that the DATA Minnesota is referring to is "data ... that is accessed, stored, or transferred." That means database.

From the Minnesota's definition of open data formats:

2.5 "Free for all to implement and use in perpetuity, with no royalty or fee"
2.6 "has no restrictions on the use of data stored in the format"
2.7 "has no restrictions on the creation of software that stores, transmits, receives, or accesses data codified in such way"
2.11 "Is documented, so that anyone can write software that can read and interpret the complete semantics of any data file stored in the data format"

You would see that Minnesota is clearly defining open standards for the storage, retrieval and transamission of data and, once again, that means database.

Now your list of "open data formats" contain a lot of different standards and products, employing many different data formats, but none of them can be considered an "open data format" according to the Minnesota's specifications.

Hyper Text Markup Language (HTML) is not an open data format but a process language used for publishing hypertext on the World Wide Web. As a matter of fact, HTML has no facility for accessing and storing data.

So along came the Extensible Markup Language (XML), which isn't an open data format either, but a data manipulation language, built so data processing could be done on the web, inside HTML.

Tau Epsilon Chi (TeX) is a computer language designed for use in typesetting; in particular, for typesetting math and other technical material. It is not an open data format. (I had to look this one up).

American Standard Code for Information Interchange (ASCII) is not an open data format but a code. So I guess, as long as you consider codes an open data format, we should include binary, octal, decimal, hexadecimal and Morse codes as open standard formats.

PostScript is not only proprietary, it is a programming language optimized for printing graphics and text.

RTF is a document interchange format.

Portable Document Format (PDF) is used for document exchange and is an excellent bridge between the paper and computer worlds. It is not now, nor ever been open. It's only functional when you use Adobe's proprietary software suite.

As one of the original members of the Open Software Foundation (OSF) that produced UNIX, I can tell you that open anything is a wonderful concept but fails when the rubber meets the road for a number of marketing, cultural and organizational reasons.

Your tagline tells me that you're a Mac aficionado and a member of the "I hate Microsoft club" and that's fine but you ignore the big guys, IBM, SUN, Oracle and others who are in the DATA business. Apple has never, ever been in the data business. It's biggest sales feature is still its ability to produce graphics.

When was the last time you were near a Mac network of 50,000 clients accessing a database server with 15 terrabytes of DATA?

[Knitebane]

I attempted to paint a humorous picture of the difficulties of implementing open standards for the storage and retrieval of corporate and agency data. By extension, implementing any standard, especially when initiated by mandate.

Of course, because any mandated standards, like voltage deliverd to homes and businesses, automobile safety standards or RF spectrum usage is so difficult that it's never been done.

However, the Minnesota document clearly shows that the DATA Minnesota is referring to is "data ... that is accessed, stored, or transferred." That means database.

Uh, no it doesn't. It means data. Much of the rest of your message simply lays out the information about the kinds of open standards that exist for different kinds of data.

But if you want to be irritatingly anal about it, then let's talk databases.

Let's try OBDC, JBDC and SQLn, all of which are open standards.

Happy?

Your tagline tells me that you're a Mac aficionado and a member of the "I hate Microsoft club" and that's fine but you ignore the big guys, IBM, SUN, Oracle and others who are in the DATA business.

Actually, I've never owned a Mac. Jumping to conclusions makes you look like an idiot. The closest I've ever come to being a Mac person is when I worked as a VAR. I sold and supported Macs along with DECs, Compaqs, Suns and IBMs. Several of my customers were newspaper and book publishers and since they required Macs, I took care of them. They were, however, a very small part of my customer base. I preferred my VMS, AIX and Sun customers.

When was the last time you were near a Mac network of 50,000 clients accessing a database server with 15 terrabytes of DATA?

Like I said, I'm not a Mac guy. However, I've worked with systems that routinely process that much data and they use open formats.