[OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Sign the Hague declaration

jo at frot.org jo at frot.org
Thu May 15 08:59:36 PDT 2008


On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 05:53:16AM +0100, Lester Caine wrote:
> >You must not mean a "M$" Office Open XML document since it is of course 
> >and open standard.  *shrug* 
> 
> Well since M$ do not have any software that actually produces OOXML 
> documents yet .... At least not to the format submitted to ISO ;)
> The main problem THERE of cause is that ISO standards are not free and open 
> anyway. HOW much does a copy cost :)

Well, free-as-in-speech does not have to imply free-as-in-beer.
Also, some ISO standards *are* available gratis/free (such as WMS, 
which also is both libre/free and gratis/free available from OGC);
I can usually find gratis/free versions of ISO "open standards" 
by searching the web for the DIS (draft) version, and my rights to
implement and discuss them remains gratis/free.

Whether the ISO approach is appropriate or successful - either at
helping businesses or promoting "best practise" - is definitely
another, awkward question :) 

Another problem here is talking as if we agree on what a "free and open"
standard is. Even http://www.digistan.org/open-standard:definition
does not clearly, to my reading, differentiate between libre/free and
gratis/free. http://blog.okfn.org/2008/05/14/dispatches-from-digistan/
elaborates on this and on their idea of "openness metrics", and on a
draft "open format definition" which some OSGeo members have
contributed to - though clearly Digistan's plans go a lot further than
formats. As for "force and exclude", the Digistan definition does not
go much further than the European Commission have already gone, cf
http://www.openstandards.eu/definition 

The question then becomes more one about decision-making and planning
processes for "non-profit organisations", and how to build models that
will prevent inter-organisation "stewards" from tending to serve their own
interests rather than those of wider business and technical communities.
Cool, OSGeo has collectively to think about this as well!


jo
--



More information about the Discuss mailing list