Hi Charles,
Charles-H. Schulz skrev:
You are welcome. I'll try to keep you up to date. I think the danish discussion could be important for the rest of Europe.Leif,thank you for this detailed report.
The paper that we are dicussing right now is the implementation plan (http://itst.dk/static/nyhed/English%20summary.odt). I quess that each individual institution will make their own detailed roadmap.I have several questions for you: - to me it looks like the situation in France. Do you have a roadmap for the adoption of this resolution?
Sure. Nothing secret here. The text is on my blog (http://lodahl.blogspot.com)- can I forward this mail to the OASIS ODF Adoption Committee?
I think we have all the details for now. The answering periode is passed now.- Is there anyway that OOo, the ODF Alliance and/or the OASIS ODF Adoption Committee can help you?
What might be heplfull at this point could be some international attention. I don't know if the discussion in Denmark is refered to in the press in other countries. If you see anything, please let me know.
-- Med venlig hilsen - best regards, Leif Lodahl Native-Language coordinator DA.OpenOffice.org Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://lodahl.blogspot.com/
Best, Charles. Leif Lodahl a écrit :Here is a short summary from your local 'war correspondent'. Read more on my blog: http://lodahl.blogspot.com/ Last summer the parliament (Folketinget) agreed on a resolution (B 103) proposing that Denmark should use open standard formats in public governement. This resolution was proposed by the opposition. In february the The Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation revealed the implementation plan for B 103. This plan consist of several implementations including standard formats for documents. The plan defines open standards quite close to what we normaly do: ...that a standard is open implies that: - the standard must be fully documented and publicly available, - the standard must be freely implementable without economic, political or legal constraints on its implementation and use, now or in the future, and - the standard should be managed and maintained in an open forum via an open process (standardization organization). But in the implementation plan is given a choice: ODF or Office OpenXML. It is very important to remember that the resolution was proposed by the opposition and that the governement actually don't like it. The democratical process in Denmark has given everybody the chance to answer to this implementation plan. Several answers has been given so far: From a group of NGOs (including DA.OpenOffice.org), OSL (The Danish Open Source Business Association) known from the famous Ramboell report and Danish IT-Political Organisation. The answers given so far is basicly to two things: 1) Why do we need two standards ? One is enough 2) How can Office OpenXML be classified as 'open' when we know that there are several dependencies indicating that the format is NOT an open standard. The war continues. References: Folketinget Resolution B 103 (unofficial english translation) http://itpol.dk/sager/offpol/b103_eng/ Implementation plan (english summary) http://itst.dk/static/nyhed/English%20summary.pdf Answer from several NGOs (danish) http://www.oooforum.dk/viewtopic.php?t=2622 Answer from OSL (danish) http://www.osl.dk/hoeringssvar_aabne_standarder/ Ramboell report (english) http://www.osl.dk/upload-mappe/Ram_engODF/--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
