David Forslund wrote:
> Will,
> I agree with you, which is why I also argue for using standards for
> the communication and
> interfaces in a system. That way one can replace the system with others
> that implement
> those same standards. This allows even for a replacement of an open
> source solution
> with a proprietary one as long as the standards are conformed to. So
> to reduce the
> risk you describe for open source, I recommend using open standards. In
> fact,
> I believe that open standards are normally a better protection against
> vendor lock-in
> than open source. The combination of open source and open standards is
> very powerful.
> The Shark workflow engine I've mentioned before falls into this category.
problem is, they need to be good standards; and the current paradigm for
creating standards in most SDOs is almost guaranteed to produce
something mediocre at the very best...and with no vehicle for ongoing
evolution or support until the next 5 year round...
- thomas beale
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/openhealth/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
