[Solar-general] Spanish Interoperability Framework released

Mar Feb 9 13:43:50 CET 2010

Mandatory open standards may strengthen Microsoft's dominance.

I will resume our experiences from Danmark where we since 2006 have
had a parliament decision on weak mandatory use of open standards
(comply or explain) in Danish state.

The problem is that Microsoft has very strong influence on ISO
concerning OOXML, and as you know OOXML has been adopted by ISO as an
open standard. They have succeeded in having the rejected parts of
OOXML adopted in a transitional variant of OOXML (OOMXM-Transition for
backward compatibility), and this stand does Microsofts Office comply
with. Now, what happens is that Microsoft puts extreme pressure on
government and politicians for having OOXML accepted as an open
standard, and indeed they have succeeded. The discussion is whether
OOXML-Transitional, or OOXML-Strict only, should be approved.
OOXML-Strict is not yet implemented by Microsoft, and it will take at
least 2 years before it is. Microsoft definitely dislikes that their
Microsoft Office should not comply with a mandatory open standard in
the next two or more years. If  OOXML-Transitional is approved, the
Danish state's IT-office may impose the "open standard"
OOXML-Transitional and Microsoft Office on all Danish state offices
(it doesn't matter that ODF is an open standard, too, except that a
few citizens will communicate with the state using that format).

Thus, the risk is that Microsoft's office standard may go from being a
de facto dominating standard to a de jure imposed standard! In short,
Microsoft is close to strengthen their position in Denmark. We have
been so lucky that there is an majority in the parliament against
adopting OOXML-Transitional. But, since Microsoft is close to dominate
ISO in this connection, the danger is that the distinction between
OOXML-Strict and OOXML-Transitional is blurred.

It is not a funny story to be told after you have done so much work
for open standards in Spain, I know.  I hope you forgive me.  But,
Microsoft goes absolutely mad if OOXML is not approved as an open
standard, because it threatens their entire business. They will use
any political mean at their disposition. So, if you are not
politically really, really, really clever in Spain, I guess you will
loose, and OOXML will be the Spanish government's open standard -
though ODF will be adopted for the sake of hypocrisy though it has
little importance.

Flemming

Alberto Barrionuevo wrote:
> On Lunes, 8 de Febrero de 2010 20:20:41 bjerke escribió:
>> Fine! But, what about OOXML/ODF?
>
> The technical part is to be decided yet by the Government.
> Currently has been published only the normative part that is the
> legal base for the technical stuff, the detailed rules, the
> procedures, the officialization of public interoperability services
> (networks, eID, etc.), etc.
>
> The Framework has been done fully in a top-down way, and we are yet
> in the middle of the piramid. But what is important is that now
> there is little room for "imaginative" interpretations. And also is
> important that almost everything has already been studied and
> developed, so now the Government just need to write black on white
> the details.
>
> Anyway, ODF is 100% compliant with the normative part.
>
> I cannot speak about OOXML yet, sorry.
>
> Our research said that 20% of the ~550 analysed protocols, formats,
>  methodologies, metrics, etc. were "open standards"; and that for
> almost all the featuring fields analysed, there were open
> estandards available. And this is the main conclusion: "The public
> sector can serve using always open standards".
>
> Additionally, the Framework says that if for any feature there is
> no open standard available, the Government must promote its
> creation. And there are at least two concrete public entities
> entitled for such a task.
>
> Also there is an interesting part promoting the reuse of software
> between administrations and the licensing of public software with
> the EUPL and compatible licenses.
>
> Saludos, //Alberto.
>
> PS: the most interesting part is that most of what we have
> developed is already written in the Law 11/2007 [EN non-official
> version]: http://bit.ly/9Mqajq
>
>
>
>> Flemming
>>
>> Alberto Barrionuevo skrev:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> this is just to aware you that the maximum legal norm in terms
>>> of interoperability in the Spanish public sector, has been
>>> officially published by Government few days ago.
>>>
>>> And finally it looks very good: mandatory open standards +
>>> sharing of code for the whole Spanish Public Sector.
>>>
>>> As you know, OPENTIA has been during the last two years deeply
>>> and proudly involved in the development of this legal framework
>>> and the depending technical rulings that will come after this
>>> one.
>>>
>>> We've had just time to writte a PR in the name of our company,
>>> but I expect, when we deliver another project we are cooking
>>> currently, to write a deeper analysis in English and Spanish.
>>>
>>> Our PR: http://bit.ly/cd8EdA  [English] http://bit.ly/9EJ7lh
>>> [Spanish] http://www.opentia.com  [more infor in EN & ES]
>>>
>>> Our participation in the project is covered by several media in
>>>  digital and paper:
>>> http://news.google.com/news/search?aq=f&pz=1&cf=all&ned=es&hl=es&q=openti
>>>  a
>>>
>>> I'll be back...
>

-- 
Diego Saravia
Diego.Saravia en gmail.com
NO FUNCIONA->dsa en unsa.edu.ar