Posted on 04/05/2006 4:58:29 PM PDT by 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....
(Excerpt) Read more at consortiuminfo.org ...
SWC, they are not forcing the use of open source they are forcing open standards. If they forced law firms who do business with the state to use Linux or openoffice I would be upset but publishing all government papaers in an open format is a good thing..
I actually implemented a variation of this with an ODF document via of a script that could open and validate the integrity of the file data on the fly. Pretty cool, and really simple too.
Well, that's the beauty of the ODF/XML format. While the software support for digital sigs may not be there now, it would be easy to impliment in the future as you have demonstrated.
Who is claiming they can't read or write using the defacto Microsoft standards now? You guys are always boasting you can do that with your free software anyway, so what supposedly is your problem now?
Nobody is claiming that there is a technology barrier in implimenting the MS XML Spec but you have to sign a license which gives MS the right to yank your right to use is if you sue MS or an associate for violating any of your IP.
"Microsoft reserves the right to terminate this license grant if you sue Microsoft or any of Microsoft's affiliates for patent infringement over claims relating to reading or writing of files that comply with the Office Schemas. This license is perpetual subject to this reservation."
Thats very different from the license from ODF...
Making a lot of assumptions with absolutley no proof aren't ya?
And how to you know that some entity supporty open format didn't do a little "palm-greasing"? Oh that's right ONLY evil MS can do that.
I love when people throw around unjustified accusations, but only for one side.
SWC,
But if they did say that they would be saying that its wrong to store government information in a format that anyone has the right to use the *should* piss off conservatives. How do we hold the government accountable if the *can* hide basic information from you.
If MS does indeed put ODF support into office 12 (http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20051027115159254) then we will see if people were more upset about office being closed source or that information is open to the public..
Simple, OpenSource users and developers are hemp wearing hippies in their basement they dont have the money to grease palms /sarcasm ;)
My thinking is that they are saying they CANNOT use current MS technology and therefore are eliminating about 80% of the people who will be using the information who can't open ODF. And since when is using excel, word, etc HIDING information? How many offices do you know that run ONLY linux and not MS?
Er, the same people who would foot the cost associated with being captive to a single vender?
There are standards and requirements involved with just about all government purchases, btw.
You and I might be in agreement. Whe I read this I took the part "the concept that government has a responsibility to protect the taxpayers" as sarcasm. Really.
Your beloved freeware opens Microsoft documents right now without you agreeing to a Microsoft license so why should you have to agree to it now? Or were you not telling the truth when you said your freeware could in fact read them?
"Making a lot of assumptions with absolutley no proof aren't ya?"
Hey we're talking politicians here. Personally I think most politicians are doing something illegal.
I'm glad you showed up to smear MS from the other side.
I don't have any love for MS, but they you can imagine that they are out there strong arming.
And BTW, I wasn't making accusations, I was only offering a thought.
This is not forcing private offices to do anything this is saying the storage of government communications must be in a format that any american has the right to impliment.
There are already programs out there which will allow a private office to continue to use word and the convert any docs they want to send off to the government (http://opendocument4all.com/content/view/103/49/)
The .DOC/.XLS/.PDF are not protected from implementation by the use of licensing the same way the the MS XML's are. They are being published *DESPITE* the fact they are closed because people back engineered them which with the new XML is not legally possible.
With MS themselves moving away from the *.DOCS and pushing the XML in office 12 the question muse be asked if now they cant be implemented by law whats to assure that other vendors will be able to safely create a product which will open the new format (allowing competition) and yet not give up the right to protect *any* of their IP in the event MS or an affiliate breaks some other aspect of their document filtering technology?
Just because it reads them doesn't mean MS document formats are open. Nothing stops them from changing the format, requiring the people at OO to again figure out how to read them.
That won't happen with .odt.
%s/They are being published *DESPITE*/They are being used *DESPITE*/g
And I did this ... how?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.