On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul) <bob.basq...@ci.stpaul.mn.us> wrote: > Hi all, > > > > I wonder if I could get some feedback on the following statement, I’m > looking for the other side of the argument (I know it’s hard to put yourself > there :c). > > > > “Open Source software enforces standards” > > > > Now this might be better worded, and it seems straight forward enough here. > I’m trying to define a GIO position such that it doesn’t reference anything > commercial, but will still cover those commercial packages at the same time. > I’m basically thinking about going the route of data standards both for > archiving as well as distribution. > > > > So, what would you anticipate the other side of the argument (Our Human > Resources section in this case) to reply to the above statement, as if they > wanted to include some specific commercial application in the assigned > duties, for example. In the end I’m trying to get out of a long winded > statement about why an open approach is better than a commercial one and the > standards piece seem to be the best topic to base the discussion on.
In my experience (maybe because I don't discuss this with people who know much about the subject so they have very basic opinions), they usually come with: * Standars aren't the better format to work with * Propietary standards can be more efficient because they are optimized for the propietary software * We already have the information on the propietary format and don't want to migrate And, of course: * Our propietary solution also works with standards (this is very tricky to fight against) Good luck! María. > > > > Thanks > > > > Bobb > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss