blog/tags/standard/index.html

   1 <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
   2         "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
   3 <html>
   4  <head>
   5   <title>Petter Reinholdtsen: Entries Tagged standard</title>
   6   <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/style.css">
   7   <link rel="alternate" title="RSS Feed" href="standard.rss" type="application/rss+xml">
   8  </head>
   9  <body>
  10
  11  <div class="title">
  12   <h1>
  13        <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/">Petter Reinholdtsen</a>
  14
  15   </h1>
  16
  17  </div>
  18
  19  <p>Entries tagged "standard".</p>
  20
  21
  22
  23
  24 <div class="entry">
  25  <div class="title">
  26  <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/ODF_bruk_i_staten__ikke_helt_p___plass.html">ODF-bruk i staten, ikke helt på plass</a>
  27  </div>
  28  <div class="date">
  29   2009-01-22 23:00
  30  </div>
  31
  32  <div class="body">
  33
  34 <p>I går publiserte
  35 <a href="http://universitas.no/nyhet/52776/">Universitas</a>,
  36 <a href="http://www.dagensit.no/trender/article1588462.ece">Dagens-IT</a>
  37 og <a href="http://www.idg.no/computerworld/article118622.ece">Computerworld
  38 Norge</a> en sak om at de ansatte ved Universitetet i Oslo ikke følger
  39 regjeringens pålegg om å publisere i HTML, PDF eller ODF.  Det er bra
  40 at det kommer litt fokus på dette, og jeg håper noen journalister tar
  41 en titt på de andre statlige instansene også.</p>
  42
  43 <p>Skulle ønske det var en enkel måte å sjekke om ODF-dokumenter er i
  44 henholdt til ODF-spesifikasjonen, og en måte å teste om programmer som
  45 hevder å støtte ODF forstår alle delene av ODF-spesifikasjonen.
  46 Kjenner kun til ufullstendige løsninger for slikt.</p>
  47
  48  </div>
  49  <div class="tags">
  50
  51
  52
  53   Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
  54
  55  </div>
  56 </div>
  57 <div class="padding"></div>
  58
  59 <div class="entry">
  60  <div class="title">
  61  <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Hva_er_egentlig_en___pen_standard_.html">Hva er egentlig en åpen standard?</a>
  62  </div>
  63  <div class="date">
  64   2009-03-28 10:50
  65  </div>
  66
  67  <div class="body">
  68
  69 <p>Jeg møter alle slags interessante mennesker på min vei, og et møte
  70 jeg lærte mye av var å treffe på en svært kompetent IT-fyr som
  71 benektet ting jeg anser som åpenbart og selvfølgelig når det gjelder
  72 standarder.  Det var interessant, da det fikk meg til å tenke litt
  73 nøyere på hvilke mekanismer som ligger til grunn for at noe oppfattes
  74 som en standard.  Det hele startet med arbeid rundt integrering av NSS
  75 LDAP mot Active Directory, og problemer som oppstår pga. at Active
  76 Directory ikke følger LDAP-spesifikasjonen som dokumentert i RFCer fra
  77 IETF (konkret, AD returnerer kun et subset av attributter hvis det er
  78 mer enn 1500 atributter av en gitt type i et LDAP-objekt, og en må be
  79 om resten i bolker av 1500).  Jeg hevdet måten dette ble gjort på brøt
  80 med LDAP-spesifikasjonen, og henviste til hvor i LDAP-spesifikasjonen
  81 fra IETF det sto at oppførselen til AD ikke fulgte
  82 LDAP-spesifikasjonen.  AD-spesialisten overrasket meg da ved å
  83 fortelle at IETF var ikke de som definerte LDAP-spesifikasjonen, og at
  84 Active Directory ikke brøt den virkelige LDAP-spesifikasjonen som han
  85 mente lå til grunn.  Jeg ble spesielt overrasket over denne
  86 tilnærmingen til problemstillingen, da til og med Microsoft så vidt
  87 jeg kan se anerkjenner IETF som organisasjonen som definerer
  88 LDAP-spesifikasjonen.  Jeg fikk aldri spurt hvem han mente sto bak den
  89 egentlige LDAP-spesifikasjonen, da det var irrelevant for problemet vi
  90 måtte løse (få Linux og AD til å fungere sammen).  Dette møtet
  91 fortalte meg uansett at det ikke er gitt at alle aktører er enige om
  92 hva en standard er, og hva som er kilden til en gitt standard.  Det er
  93 vanskelig å enes om felles standarder før en først enes om hvem som
  94 bestemmer hva en gitt standard innebærer.</p>
  95
  96 <p>Hva er så en standard?  I sin abstrakte form er det noe å samles
  97 om.  På engelsk er en av betydningene fane brukt i krig, du vet, den
  98 type fane en samlet seg rundt på kamplassen i riddertiden.  En
  99 standard definerer altså et felleskap, noen som har noe felles.  Det
 100 er naturligvis mange måter å utgjøre et felleskap på.  En kan
 101 f.eks. enes om å gjøre alt slik som Ole gjør det, og dermed si at Oles
 102 oppførsel er standard.  Hver gang Ole endrer oppførsel endrer også
 103 standarden seg uten noe mer organisering og prosedyre.  En variant av
 104 dette er å gjøre slik som Ole har gjort det i stedet for slik Ole til
 105 enhver til gjør noe.  Dette er ofte litt enklere å forholde seg til,
 106 da en slipper å sjekke med Ole hver gang for å vite hvordan ting skal
 107 gjøres nå, men hvis det Ole gjorde noe dumt den gang en bestemte seg
 108 for å følge Ole, så er det vanskeligere å få endret oppførsel for å
 109 unngå dette dumme.</p>
 110
 111 <p>En kan også ta det et skritt videre, og istedet for å basere seg på
 112 enkeltpersoners oppførsel sette seg ned og bli enige om hvordan en
 113 skal gjøre ting, dvs. lage et felleskap basert på konsensus.  Dette
 114 tar naturligvis litt mer tid (en må diskutere ting i forkant før en
 115 kan sette igang), men det kan bidra til at den oppførselen en
 116 planlegger å benytte seg av er mer gjennomtenkt.  Det ender også
 117 typisk opp med en beskrivelse av ønsket oppførsel som flere kan forstå
 118 - da flere har vært involvert i å utarbeide beskrivelsen.</p>
 119
 120 <p>Dette er dessverre ikke alt som trengs for å forstå hva en åpen
 121 standard er for noe.  Der alle kan se på hvordan folk oppfører seg, og
 122 dermed har valget om de vil oppføre seg likt eller ikke, så er det
 123 endel juridiske faktorer som gjør det hele mer komplisert -
 124 opphavsretten og patentlovgivningen for å være helt konkret.  For å gi
 125 et eksempel. Hvis noen blir enige om å alltid plystre en bestemt
 126 melodi når de møtes, for å identifisere hverandre, så kan
 127 opphavsretten brukes til å styre hvem som får lov til å gjøre dette.
 128 De har standardisert hvordan de kjenner igjen alle som følger denne
 129 standarden, men ikke alle har nødvendigvis lov til å følge den.
 130 Musikk er opphavsrettsbeskyttet, og fremføring av musikk i
 131 offentligheten er opphavsmannens enerett (dvs. et monopol).  Det vil i
 132 sin ytterste konsekvens si at alle som skal plystre en
 133 opphavsrettsbeskyttet melodi i det offentlige rom må ha godkjenning
 134 fra opphavsmannen.  Har en ikke dette, så bryter en loven og kan
 135 straffes.  Det er dermed mulig for opphavsmannen å kontrollere hvem
 136 som får lov til å benytte seg av denne standarden.  En annen variant
 137 er hvis en standard er dokumentert, så er dokumentet som definerer
 138 standarden (spesifikasjonen) beskyttet av opphavsretten, og det er
 139 dermed mulig for rettighetsinnehaver å begrense tilgang til
 140 spesifikasjonen, og slik styre hvem som kan ta i bruk standarden på
 141 den måten.</p>
 142
 143 <p>Der opphavsretten innvilger et monopol på kunstneriske uttrykk med
 144 verkshøyde, innvilger patentlovgivningen monopol på ideer.  Hvis en
 145 slik patentert idé (fortrinnsvis uttrykt i en teknisk innretning, men
 146 det er kompliserende faktorer som gjør at det ikke er et krav) trengs
 147 for å ta i bruk en standard, så vil den som innehar patent kunne styre
 148 hvem som får ta i bruk standarden.  Det er dermed ikke gitt at alle
 149 kan delta i et standard-felleskap, og hvis de kan delta, så er det
 150 ikke sikkert at det er på like vilkår.  F.eks. kan rettighetsinnehaver
 151 sette vilkår som gjør at noen faller utenfor, det være seg av
 152 finansielle, avtalemessige eller prinsipielle årsaker.  Vanlige slike
 153 vilkår er "må betale litt for hver kunde/bruker" som utelukker de som
 154 gir bort en løsning gratis og "må gi fra seg retten til å håndheve
 155 sine egne patentrettigheter ovenfor rettighetshaver" som utelukker
 156 alle som ønsker å beholde den muligheten.</p>
 157
 158 <p>En åpen standard innebærer for meg at alle kan få innsikt i en
 159 komplett beskrivelse av oppførsel som standarden skal dekke, og at
 160 ingen kan nektes å benytte seg av standarden.  Noen mener at det
 161 holder at alle med tilstrekkelig finansiering kan få tilgang til
 162 spesifikasjonen og at en kun har finansielle krav til bruk.
 163 Pga. denne konflikten har et nytt begrep spredt seg de siste årene,
 164 nemlig fri og åpen standard, der en har gjort det klart at alle må ha
 165 komplett og lik tilgang til spesifikasjoner og retten til å gjøre bruk
 166 av en standard for at en standard skal kunne kalles fri og åpen.</p>
 167
 168  </div>
 169  <div class="tags">
 170
 171
 172
 173   Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
 174
 175  </div>
 176 </div>
 177 <div class="padding"></div>
 178
 179 <div class="entry">
 180  <div class="title">
 181  <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Standardize_on_protocols_and_formats__not_vendors_and_applications.html">Standardize on protocols and formats, not vendors and applications</a>
 182  </div>
 183  <div class="date">
 184   2009-03-30 11:50
 185  </div>
 186
 187  <div class="body">
 188
 189 <p>Where I work at the University of Oslo, one decision stand out as a
 190 very good one to form a long lived computer infrastructure.  It is the
 191 simple one, lost by many in todays computer industry: Standardize on
 192 open network protocols and open exchange/storage formats, not applications.
 193 Applications come and go, while protocols and files tend to stay, and
 194 thus one want to make it easy to change application and vendor, while
 195 avoiding conversion costs and locking users to a specific platform or
 196 application.</p>
 197
 198 <p>This approach make it possible to replace the client applications
 199 independently of the server applications.  One can even allow users to
 200 use several different applications as long as they handle the selected
 201 protocol and format.  In the normal case, only one client application
 202 is recommended and users only get help if they choose to use this
 203 application, but those that want to deviate from the easy path are not
 204 blocked from doing so.</p>
 205
 206 <p>It also allow us to replace the server side without forcing the
 207 users to replace their applications, and thus allow us to select the
 208 best server implementation at any moment, when scale and resouce
 209 requirements change.</p>
 210
 211 <p>I strongly recommend standardizing - on open network protocols and
 212 open formats, but I would never recommend standardizing on a single
 213 application that do not use open network protocol or open formats.</p>
 214
 215  </div>
 216  <div class="tags">
 217
 218
 219
 220   Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/debian">debian</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
 221
 222  </div>
 223 </div>
 224 <div class="padding"></div>
 225
 226 <div class="entry">
 227  <div class="title">
 228  <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Hvorfor_jeg_ikke_bruker_eFaktura.html">Hvorfor jeg ikke bruker eFaktura</a>
 229  </div>
 230  <div class="date">
 231   2009-04-23 23:00
 232  </div>
 233
 234  <div class="body">
 235
 236 <p>Telenors annonsering om å kreve 35 kroner i gebyr fra alle som
 237 ønsker papirfaktura har satt sinnene i kok, og pressedekningen så
 238 langt snakker om at eldre og folk som ikke behersker data vil få en
 239 urimelig ekstrakostnad.  Jeg tror ikke jeg passer inn i noen av de
 240 kategoriene, men velger å holde meg unna eFaktura - som er det
 241 Telenor ønsker å få folk over på - pga. systemets egenskaper.</p>
 242
 243 <p>Slik jeg har sett eFaktura til forbrukere så langt, så sender
 244 selger en elektronisk beskjed til kundens bank, som legger ut
 245 informasjon om fakturaen i nettbanken for godkjenning.  Personlig
 246 ville jeg sett det som mer naturlig at det gikk en elektronisk beskjed
 247 fra selger til kunde, dvs meg, og at jeg så kunne bruke den videre
 248 mot banken eller andre hvis jeg ønsket dette.  Mine innkjøp og
 249 regninger er jo en sak mellom meg og mine leverandører, ikke en sak
 250 mellom min bank og mine leverandører.  Kun hvis jeg ønsker å betale
 251 fakturaen skal banken involveres.  En faktura bør jo inn i
 252 regnskapet, og jeg ønsker mulighet til å legge det inn der.  Når
 253 fakturaen sendes til banken i stedet for meg, blir det vanskeligere.
 254 Hele eFaktura-modellen virker på meg som en umyndiggjøring av meg
 255 som kunde.</p>
 256
 257 <p>I tillegg har jeg ikke vært i stand til å finne
 258 eFaktura-formatets spesifikasjon, og det ser ut til at utsending av
 259 slike krever dyre avtaler med bankene for å få lov til å sende ut
 260 eFaktura til kunder.  Jeg ser vel helst at fakturering på
 261 elektroniske formater kan gjøres f.eks. via epost eller HTTP uten å
 262 måtte betale mellommenn for retten til å lever ut en faktura, og
 263 liker rett og slett ikke dagens faktureringsmodeller.</p>
 264
 265  </div>
 266  <div class="tags">
 267
 268
 269
 270   Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
 271
 272  </div>
 273 </div>
 274 <div class="padding"></div>
 275
 276 <div class="entry">
 277  <div class="title">
 278  <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Standarder_fungerer_best_n__r_en_samler_seg_rundt_dem.html">Standarder fungerer best når en samler seg rundt dem</a>
 279  </div>
 280  <div class="date">
 281   2009-05-19 11:30
 282  </div>
 283
 284  <div class="body">
 285
 286 <p>En standard er noe man samler seg rundt, ut fra ideen om at en får
 287 fordeler når mange står sammen.  Jo flere som står sammen, jo
 288 bedre.  Når en vet dette, blir det litt merkelig å lese noen av
 289 uttalelsene som er kommet inn til
 290 <a href="http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/fad/dok/horinger/horingsdokumenter/2009/horing---referansekatalog-versjon-2/horingsuttalelser.html?id=549423">høringen
 291 om versjon 2 av statens referansekatalog over standarder</a>.  Blant
 292 annet Abelia, NHO og Microsoft tror det er lurt med flere standarder
 293 innenfor samme område.  Det blir som å si at det er fint om Norge
 294 standardiserte både på A4- og Letter-størrelser på arkene, ulik
 295 sporvidde på jernbaneskinnene, meter og fot som lengemål, eller
 296 høyre- og venstrekjøring - slik at en kan konkurrere på hvilken
 297 standard som er best.  De fleste forstår heldigvis at dette ikke
 298 bidrar positivt.</p>
 299
 300  </div>
 301  <div class="tags">
 302
 303
 304
 305   Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
 306
 307  </div>
 308 </div>
 309 <div class="padding"></div>
 310
 311 <div class="entry">
 312  <div class="title">
 313  <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Microsofts_misvisende_argumentasjon_rundt_multimediaformater.html">Microsofts misvisende argumentasjon rundt multimediaformater</a>
 314  </div>
 315  <div class="date">
 316   2009-06-26-13:30
 317  </div>
 318
 319  <div class="body">
 320
 321 <p>I
 322 <a href="http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/FAD/Vedlegg/Hoeringer/Refkat_V2/MicrosoftNorge.pdf">Microsoft
 323 sin høringsuttalelse</a> til
 324 <a href="http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/fad/dok/horinger/horingsdokumenter/2009/horing---referansekatalog-versjon-2.html?id=549422">forslag
 325 til versjon 2 av statens referansekatalog over standarder</a>, lirer
 326 de av seg følgende FUD-perle:</p>
 327
 328 <p><blockquote>"Vorbis, OGG, Theora og FLAC er alle tekniske
 329   spesifikasjoner overordnet styrt av xiph.org, som er en
 330   ikke-kommersiell organisasjon.  Etablerte og anerkjente
 331   standardiseringsorganisasjoner, som Oasis, W3C og Ecma, har en godt
 332   innarbeidet vedlikeholds- og forvaltningsprosess av en standard.
 333   Det er derimot helt opp til hver enkelt organisasjon å bestemme
 334   hvordan tekniske spesifikasjoner videreutvikles og endres, og disse
 335   spesifikasjonene bør derfor ikke defineres som åpne
 336   standarder."</blockquote></p>
 337
 338 <p>De vokter seg vel for å nevne den anerkjente
 339 standardiseringsorganisasjonen IETF, som er organisasjonen bak HTTP,
 340 IP og det meste av protokoller på Internet, og RFC-standardene som
 341 IETF står bak.  Ogg er spesifisert i
 342 <a href="http://ietf.org/rfc/rfc3533.txt">RFC 3533</a>, og er uten
 343 tvil å anse som en åpen standard.  Vorbis er
 344 <a href="http://ietf.org/rfc/rfc5215.txt">RFC 5215</a>.  Theora er
 345
 346 under standardisering via IETF, med
 347 <a href="http://svn.xiph.org/trunk/theora/doc/draft-ietf-avt-rtp-theora-00.txt">siste
 348 utkast publisert 2006-07-21</a> (riktignok er dermed teksten ikke
 349 skrevet i stein ennå, men det blir neppe endringer som ikke er
 350 bakoverkompatibel).  De kan være inne på noe når det gjelder FLAC da
 351 jeg ikke finner tegn til at <a
 352 href="http://flac.sourceforge.net/format.html">spesifikasjonen
 353 tilgjengelig på web</a> er på tur via noen
 354 standardiseringsorganisasjon, men i og med at folkene bak Ogg, Theora
 355 og Vorbis også har involvert seg i Flac siden 2003, så ser jeg ikke
 356 bort fra at også den organiseres via IETF.  Jeg kjenner personlig lite
 357 til FLAC.</p>
 358
 359 <p>Uredelig argumentasjon bør en holde seg for god til å komme med,
 360 spesielt når det er så enkelt i dagens Internet-hverdag å gå
 361 misvisende påstander etter i sømmene.</p>
 362
 363  </div>
 364  <div class="tags">
 365
 366
 367
 368   Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>.
 369
 370  </div>
 371 </div>
 372 <div class="padding"></div>
 373
 374 <div class="entry">
 375  <div class="title">
 376  <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Regjerningen_forlater_prinsippet_om_ingen_royalty_betaling_i_standardkatalogen_versjon_2.html">Regjerningen forlater prinsippet om ingen royalty-betaling i standardkatalogen versjon 2</a>
 377  </div>
 378  <div class="date">
 379   2009-07-06 21:00
 380  </div>
 381
 382  <div class="body">
 383
 384 <p>Jeg ble glad da regjeringen
 385 <a href="http://www.digi.no/817635/her-er-statens-nye-it-standarder">annonserte</a>
 386 versjon 2 av
 387 <a href="http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/FAD/Vedlegg/IKT-politikk/Referansekatalogen_versjon2.pdf">statens
 388 referansekatalog over standarder</a>, men trist da jeg leste hva som
 389 faktisk var vedtatt etter
 390 <a href="http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/fad/dok/horinger/horingsdokumenter/2009/horing---referansekatalog-versjon-2.html">høringen</a>.
 391 De fleste av de valgte åpne standardene er gode og vil bidra til at
 392 alle kan delta på like vilkår i å lage løsninger for staten, men
 393 noen av dem blokkerer for de som ikke har anledning til å benytte
 394 spesifikasjoner som krever betaling for bruk (såkalt
 395 royalty-betaling).  Det gjelder spesifikt for H.264 for video og MP3
 396 for lyd.  Så lenge bruk av disse var valgfritt mens Ogg Theora og Ogg
 397 Vorbis var påkrevd, kunne alle som ønsket å spille av video og lyd
 398 fra statens websider gjøre dette uten å måtte bruke programmer der
 399 betaling for bruk var nødvendig.  Når det nå er gjort valgfritt for
 400 de statlige etatene å bruke enten H.264 eller Theora (og MP3 eler
 401 Vorbis), så vil en bli tvunget til å forholde seg til
 402 royalty-belastede standarder for å få tilgang til videoen og
 403 lyden.</p>
 404
 405 <p>Det gjør meg veldig trist at regjeringen har forlatt prinsippet om
 406 at alle standarder som ble valgt til å være påkrevd i katalogen skulle
 407 være uten royalty-betaling.  Jeg håper det ikke betyr at en har mistet
 408 all forståelse for hvilke prinsipper som må følges for å oppnå
 409 likeverdig konkurranse mellom aktørene i IT-bransjen.  NUUG advarte
 410 mot dette i
 411 <a href="http://wiki.nuug.no/uttalelser/200901-standardkatalog-v2">sin
 412 høringsuttalelse</a>, men ser ut til å ha blitt ignorert.</p>
 413
 414  </div>
 415  <div class="tags">
 416
 417
 418
 419   Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>.
 420
 421  </div>
 422 </div>
 423 <div class="padding"></div>
 424
 425 <div class="entry">
 426  <div class="title">
 427  <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Regjerningens_oppsummering_av_h__ringen_om_standardkatalogen_versjon_2.html">Regjerningens oppsummering av høringen om standardkatalogen versjon 2</a>
 428  </div>
 429  <div class="date">
 430   2009-07-09 14:40
 431  </div>
 432
 433  <div class="body">
 434
 435 <p>For å forstå mer om hvorfor standardkatalogens versjon 2 ble som
 436 den ble, har jeg bedt om kopi fra FAD av dokumentene som ble lagt frem
 437 for regjeringen da de tok sin avgjørelse.  De er nå lagt ut på NUUGs
 438 wiki, direkte tilgjengelig via "<a
 439 href="http://wiki.nuug.no/uttalelser/200901-standardkatalog-v2?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=kongelig-resolusjon.pdf">Referansekatalogen
 440 v2.0 - Oppsummering av høring</a>" og "<a
 441 href="http://wiki.nuug.no/uttalelser/200901-standardkatalog-v2?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=kongelig-resolusjon-katalogutkast.pdf">Referansekatalog
 442 for IT-standarder i offentlig sektor Versjon 2.0, dd.mm.åååå -
 443 UTKAST</a>".</p>
 444
 445 <p>Det er tre ting jeg merker meg i oppsummeringen fra
 446 høringsuttalelsen da jeg skummet igjennom den.  Det første er at
 447 forståelsen av hvordan programvarepatenter påvirker fri
 448 programvareutvikling også i Norge når en argumenterer med at
 449 royalty-betaling ikke er et relevant problem i Norge.  Det andre er at
 450 FAD ikke har en prinsipiell forståelse av verdien av en enkelt
 451 standard innenfor hvert område.  Det siste er at påstander i
 452 høringsuttalelsene ikke blir etterprøvd (f.eks. påstanden fra
 453 Microsoft om hvordan Ogg blir standardisert og påstanden fra
 454 politidirektoratet om patentproblemer i Theora).</p>
 455
 456  </div>
 457  <div class="tags">
 458
 459
 460
 461   Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>.
 462
 463  </div>
 464 </div>
 465 <div class="padding"></div>
 466
 467 <div class="entry">
 468  <div class="title">
 469  <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/ISO_still_hope_to_fix_OOXML.html">ISO still hope to fix OOXML</a>
 470  </div>
 471  <div class="date">
 472   2009-08-08 14:00
 473  </div>
 474
 475  <div class="body">
 476
 477 <p>According to <a
 478 href="http://twerner.blogspot.com/2009/08/defects-of-office-open-xml.html">a
 479 blog post from Torsten Werner</a>, the current defect report for ISO
 480 29500 (ISO OOXML) is 809 pages.  His interesting point is that the
 481 defect report is 71 pages more than the full ODF 1.1 specification.
 482 Personally I find it more interesting that ISO still believe ISO OOXML
 483 can be fixed in ISO.  Personally, I believe it is broken beyon repair,
 484 and I completely lack any trust in ISO for being able to get anywhere
 485 close to solving the problems.  I was part of the Norwegian committee
 486 involved in the OOXML fast track process, and was not impressed with
 487 Standard Norway and ISO in how they handled it.</p>
 488
 489 <p>These days I focus on ODF instead, which seem like a specification
 490 with the future ahead of it.  We are working in NUUG to organise a ODF
 491 seminar this autumn.</p>
 492
 493  </div>
 494  <div class="tags">
 495
 496
 497
 498   Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
 499
 500  </div>
 501 </div>
 502 <div class="padding"></div>
 503
 504 <div class="entry">
 505  <div class="title">
 506  <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Relative_popularity_of_document_formats__MS_Office_vs__ODF_.html">Relative popularity of document formats (MS Office vs. ODF)</a>
 507  </div>
 508  <div class="date">
 509   2009-08-12 15:50
 510  </div>
 511
 512  <div class="body">
 513
 514 <p>Just for fun, I did a search right now on Google for a few file ODF
 515 and MS Office based formats (not to be mistaken for ISO or ECMA
 516 OOXML), to get an idea of their relative usage.  I searched using
 517 'filetype:odt' and equvalent terms, and got these results:</P>
 518
 519 <table>
 520 <tr><th>Type</th><th>ODF</th><th>MS Office</th></tr>
 521 <tr><td>Tekst</td> <td>odt:282000</td> <td>docx:308000</td></tr>
 522 <tr><td>Presentasjon</td> <td>odp:75600</td> <td>pptx:183000</td></tr>
 523 <tr><td>Regneark</td> <td>ods:26500     </td> <td>xlsx:145000</td></tr>
 524 </table>
 525
 526 <p>Next, I added a 'site:no' limit to get the numbers for Norway, and
 527 got these numbers:</p>
 528
 529 <table>
 530 <tr><th>Type</th><th>ODF</th><th>MS Office</th></tr>
 531 <tr><td>Tekst</td> <td>odt:2480 </td> <td>docx:4460</td></tr>
 532 <tr><td>Presentasjon</td> <td>odp:299   </td> <td>pptx:741</td></tr>
 533 <tr><td>Regneark</td> <td>ods:187       </td> <td>xlsx:372</td></tr>
 534 </table>
 535
 536 <p>I wonder how these numbers change over time.</p>
 537
 538 <p>I am aware of Google returning different results and numbers based
 539 on where the search is done, so I guess these numbers will differ if
 540 they are conduced in another country.  Because of this, I did the same
 541 search from a machine in California, USA, a few minutes after the
 542 search done from a machine here in Norway.</p>
 543
 544
 545 <table>
 546 <tr><th>Type</th><th>ODF</th><th>MS Office</th></tr>
 547 <tr><td>Tekst</td> <td>odt:129000</td> <td>docx:308000</td></tr>
 548 <tr><td>Presentasjon</td> <td>odp:44200</td> <td>pptx:93900</td></tr>
 549 <tr><td>Regneark</td> <td>ods:26500     </td> <td>xlsx:82400</td></tr>
 550 </table>
 551
 552 <p>And with 'site:no':
 553
 554 <table>
 555 <tr><th>Type</th><th>ODF</th><th>MS Office</th></tr>
 556 <tr><td>Tekst</td> <td>odt:2480</td> <td>docx:3410</td></tr>
 557 <tr><td>Presentasjon</td> <td>odp:175</td> <td>pptx:604</td></tr>
 558 <tr><td>Regneark</td> <td>ods:186       </td> <td>xlsx:296</td></tr>
 559 </table>
 560
 561 <p>Interesting difference, not sure what to conclude from these
 562 numbers.</p>
 563
 564  </div>
 565  <div class="tags">
 566
 567
 568
 569   Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/web">web</a>.
 570
 571  </div>
 572 </div>
 573 <div class="padding"></div>
 574
 575 <div class="entry">
 576  <div class="title">
 577  <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Danmark_g__r_for_ODF_.html">Danmark går for ODF?</a>
 578  </div>
 579  <div class="date">
 580   2010-01-29 12:00
 581  </div>
 582
 583  <div class="body">
 584
 585 <p>Ble nettopp gjort oppmerksom på en
 586 <a href="http://www.version2.dk/artikel/13690-breaking-odf-vinder-dokumentformat-krigen ">nyhet fra Version2</a>
 587 fra Danmark, der det hevdes at Folketinget har vedtatt at ODF skal
 588 brukes som dokumentutvekslingsformat i Staten.</p>
 589
 590 <p>Hyggelig lesning, spesielt hvis det viser seg at de av vedtatt
 591 kravlisten for hva som skal aksepteres som referert i kommentarfeltet
 592 til artikkelen og
 593 <a href="http://www.version2.dk/artikel/13693-er-ooxml-doemt-ude-her-er-kravene-til-en-offentlig-dokumentstandard">en
 594 annen artikkel</a> i samme nett-avis.  Liker spesielt godt denne:</p>
 595
 596 <p><blockquote> Det skal demonstreres, at standarden i sin helhed kan
 597 implementeres af alle direkte i sin helhed på flere
 598 platforme.</blockquote></p>
 599
 600 <p>Noe slikt burde være et krav også i Norge.</p>
 601
 602  </div>
 603  <div class="tags">
 604
 605
 606
 607   Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
 608
 609  </div>
 610 </div>
 611 <div class="padding"></div>
 612
 613 <div class="entry">
 614  <div class="title">
 615  <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/A_manual_for_standards_wars___.html">A manual for standards wars...</a>
 616  </div>
 617  <div class="date">
 618   2010-06-06 14:15
 619  </div>
 620
 621  <div class="body">
 622
 623 <p>Via the
 624 <a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/robweir/antic-atom/~3/QzU4RgoAGMg/weekly-links-10.html">blog
 625 of Rob Weir</a> I came across the very interesting essay named
 626 <a href="http://faculty.haas.berkeley.edu/shapiro/wars.pdf">The Art of
 627 Standards Wars</a> (PDF 25 pages).  I recommend it for everyone
 628 following the standards wars of today.</p>
 629
 630  </div>
 631  <div class="tags">
 632
 633
 634
 635   Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/debian">debian</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/debian edu">debian edu</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
 636
 637  </div>
 638 </div>
 639 <div class="padding"></div>
 640
 641 <div class="entry">
 642  <div class="title">
 643  <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Officeshots_taking_shape.html">Officeshots taking shape</a>
 644  </div>
 645  <div class="date">
 646   2010-06-13 11:40
 647  </div>
 648
 649  <div class="body">
 650
 651 <p>For those of us caring about document exchange and
 652 interoperability, <a href="http://www.officeshots.org/">OfficeShots</a>
 653 is a great service.  It is to ODF documents what
 654 <a href="http://browsershots.org/">BrowserShots</a> is for web
 655 pages.</p>
 656
 657 <p>A while back, I was contacted by Knut Yrvin at the part of Nokia
 658 that used to be Trolltech, who wanted to help the OfficeShots project
 659 and wondered if the University of Oslo where I work would be
 660 interested in supporting the project.  I helped him to navigate his
 661 request to the right people at work, and his request was answered with
 662 a spot in the machine room with power and network connected, and Knut
 663 arranged funding for a machine to fill the spot.  The machine is
 664 administrated by the OfficeShots people, so I do not have daily
 665 contact with its progress, and thus from time to time check back to
 666 see how the project is doing.</p>
 667
 668 <p>Today I had a look, and was happy to see that the Dell box in our
 669 machine room now is the host for several virtual machines running as
 670 OfficeShots factories, and the project is able to render ODF documents
 671 in 17 different document processing implementation on Linux and
 672 Windows.  This is great.</p>
 673
 674  </div>
 675  <div class="tags">
 676
 677
 678
 679   Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
 680
 681  </div>
 682 </div>
 683 <div class="padding"></div>
 684
 685 <div class="entry">
 686  <div class="title">
 687  <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Terms_of_use_for_video_produced_by_a_Canon_IXUS_130_digital_camera.html">Terms of use for video produced by a Canon IXUS 130 digital camera</a>
 688  </div>
 689  <div class="date">
 690   2010-09-09 23:55
 691  </div>
 692
 693  <div class="body">
 694
 695 <p>A few days ago I had the mixed pleasure of bying a new digital
 696 camera, a Canon IXUS 130.  It was instructive and very disturbing to
 697 be able to verify that also this camera producer have the nerve to
 698 specify how I can or can not use the videos produced with the camera.
 699 Even thought I was aware of the issue, the options with new cameras
 700 are limited and I ended up bying the camera anyway.  What is the
 701 problem, you might ask?  It is software patents, MPEG-4, H.264 and the
 702 MPEG-LA that is the problem, and our right to record our experiences
 703 without asking for permissions that is at risk.
 704
 705 <p>On page 27 of the Danish instruction manual, this section is
 706 written:</p>
 707
 708 <blockquote>
 709 <p>This product is licensed under AT&T patents for the MPEG-4 standard
 710 and may be used for encoding MPEG-4 compliant video and/or decoding
 711 MPEG-4 compliant video that was encoded only (1) for a personal and
 712 non-commercial purpose or (2) by a video provider licensed under the
 713 AT&T patents to provide MPEG-4 compliant video.</p>
 714
 715 <p>No license is granted or implied for any other use for MPEG-4
 716 standard.</p>
 717 </blockquote>
 718
 719 <p>In short, the camera producer have chosen to use technology
 720 (MPEG-4/H.264) that is only provided if I used it for personal and
 721 non-commercial purposes, or ask for permission from the organisations
 722 holding the knowledge monopoly (patent) for technology used.</p>
 723
 724 <p>This issue has been brewing for a while, and I recommend you to
 725 read
 726 "<a href="http://www.osnews.com/story/23236/Why_Our_Civilization_s_Video_Art_and_Culture_is_Threatened_by_the_MPEG-LA">Why
 727 Our Civilization's Video Art and Culture is Threatened by the
 728 MPEG-LA</a>" by Eugenia Loli-Queru and
 729 "<a href="http://webmink.com/2010/09/03/h-264-and-foss/">H.264 Is Not
 730 The Sort Of Free That Matters</a>" by Simon Phipps to learn more about
 731 the issue.  The solution is to support the
 732 <a href="http://www.digistan.org/open-standard:definition">free and
 733 open standards</a> for video, like <a href="http://www.theora.org/">Ogg
 734 Theora</a>, and avoid MPEG-4 and H.264 if you can.</p>
 735
 736  </div>
 737  <div class="tags">
 738
 739
 740
 741   Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/fildeling">fildeling</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/opphavsrett">opphavsrett</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/personvern">personvern</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/web">web</a>.
 742
 743  </div>
 744 </div>
 745 <div class="padding"></div>
 746
 747 <div class="entry">
 748  <div class="title">
 749  <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Standardkrav_inn_i_anbudstekster_.html">Standardkrav inn i anbudstekster?</a>
 750  </div>
 751  <div class="date">
 752   2010-10-17 19:30
 753  </div>
 754
 755  <div class="body">
 756
 757 <p>Hvis det å følge standarder skal ha noen effekt overfor
 758 leverandører, så må slike krav og ønsker komme inn i anbudstekster når
 759 systemer kjøpes inn.  Har ikke sett noen slike formuleringer i anbud
 760 så langt, men har tenkt litt på hva som bør inn.  Her er noen ideer og
 761 forslag.  Min drøm er at en kan sette krav til slik støtte i
 762 anbudstekster, men så langt er det nok mer sannsynlig at en må nøye
 763 seg med å skrive at det er en fordel om slik støtte er tilstede i
 764 leveranser.</p>
 765
 766 <p>Som systemadministrator på Universitetet er det typisk to områder
 767 som er problematiske for meg.  Det ene er admin-grensesnittene på
 768 tjenermaskiner, som vi ønsker å bruke via ssh.  Det andre er nettsider
 769 som vi ønsker å bruke via en nettleser.  For begge deler er det viktig
 770 at protokollene og formatene som brukes følger standarder våre verktøy
 771 støtter.</p>
 772
 773 <p>De fleste har nå støtte for SSH som overføringsprotkoll for
 774 admin-grensesnittet, men det er ikke tilstrekkelig for å kunne stille
 775 inn f.eks BIOS og RAID-kontroller via ssh-forbindelsen.  Det er flere
 776 aktuelle protokoller for fremvisning av BIOS-oppsett og
 777 oppstartmeldinger, og min anbefaling ville være å kreve
 778 VT100-kompatibel protokoll, for å sikre at flest mulig
 779 terminalemulatorer kan forstå hva som kommer fra admin-grensesnittet
 780 via ssh.  Andre aktuelle alternativer er ANSI-terminalemulering og
 781 VT220.  Kanskje en formulering ala dette i anbudsutlysninger vil
 782 fungere:</p>
 783
 784 <p><blockquote>
 785 BIOS og oppstartmeldinger i administrasjonsgrensesnittet til maskinen
 786 bør/skal være tilgjengelig via SSH-protokollen som definert av IETF
 787 (RFC 4251 mfl.) og følge terminalfremvisningprotokollen VT100 (ref?)
 788 når en kobler seg til oppstart via ssh.
 789 </blockquote></p>
 790
 791 <p>Har ikke lykkes med å finne en god referanse for
 792 VT100-spesifikasjonen.</p>
 793
 794 <p>Når det gjelder nettsider, så er det det HTML, CSS og
 795 JavaScript-spesifikasjonen til W3C som gjelder.</p>
 796
 797 <p><blockquote>
 798 Alle systemets nettider bør/skal være i henhold til statens
 799 standardkatalogs krav om nettsider og følge HTML-standarden som
 800 definert av W3C, og validere uten feil hos W3Cs HTML-validator
 801 (http://validator.w3.org).  Hvis det brukes CSS så bør/skal denne
 802 validere uten feil hos W3Cs CSS-validator
 803 (http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/).  Eventuelle JavaScript skal
 804 være i henhold til EcmaScript-standarden.  I tillegg til å følge de
 805 overnevnte standardene skal websidene fungere i nettleserne (fyll inn
 806 relevant liste for organisasjonen) Firefox 3.5, Internet Explorer 8,
 807 Opera 9, etc.
 808 </blockquote></p>
 809
 810 <p>Vil et slikt avsnitt være konkret nok til å få leverandørene til å
 811 lage nettsider som følger standardene og fungerer i flere
 812 nettlesere?</p>
 813
 814 <p>Tar svært gjerne imot innspill på dette temaet til aktive (at)
 815 nuug.no, og er spesielt interessert i hva andre skriver i sine anbud
 816 for å oppmuntre leverandører til å følge standardene.  Kanskje NUUG
 817 burde lage et dokument med forslag til standardformuleringer å ta med
 818 i anbudsutlysninger?</p>
 819
 820 <p>Oppdatering 2010-12-03: I følge Wikipedias oppføring om
 821 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANSI_escape_code">ANSI escape
 822 code</a>, så bruker VT100-terminaler ECMA-48-spesifikasjonen som
 823 basis for sin oppførsel.  Det kan dermed være et alternativ når en
 824 skal spesifisere hvordan seriell-konsoll skal fungere.</p>
 825
 826  </div>
 827  <div class="tags">
 828
 829
 830
 831   Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/web">web</a>.
 832
 833  </div>
 834 </div>
 835 <div class="padding"></div>
 836
 837 <div class="entry">
 838  <div class="title">
 839  <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Best____ikke_fortelle_noen_at_streaming_er_nedlasting___.html">Best å ikke fortelle noen at streaming er nedlasting...</a>
 840  </div>
 841  <div class="date">
 842   2010-10-30 11:20
 843  </div>
 844
 845  <div class="body">
 846
 847 <p>I dag la jeg inn en kommentar på en sak hos NRKBeta
 848 <a href="http://nrkbeta.no/2010/10/27/bakom-blindpassasjer-del-1/">om
 849 hvordan TV-serien Blindpassasjer ble laget</a> i forbindelse med at
 850 filmene NRK la ut ikke var tilgjengelig i et
 851 <a href="http://www.digistan.org/open-standard:definition">fritt og
 852 åpent format</a>.  Dette var det jeg skrev publiserte der 07:39.</p>
 853
 854 <p><blockquote>
 855 <p>"Vi fikk en kommentar rundt måten streamet innhold er beskyttet fra
 856 nedlasting.  Mange av oss som kan mer enn gjennomsnittet om systemer
 857 som dette, vet at det stort sett er mulig å lure ut ting med den
 858 nødvendige forkunnskapen."</p>
 859
 860 <p>Haha.  Å streame innhold er det samme som å laste ned innhold, så å
 861 beskytte en stream mot nedlasting er ikke mulig.  Å skrive noe slikt
 862 er å forlede leseren.</p>
 863
 864 <p>Med den bakgrunn blir forklaringen om at noen rettighetshavere kun
 865 vil tillate streaming men ikke nedlasting meningsløs.</p>
 866
 867 <p>Anbefaler forresten å lese
 868 <a href="http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2010/10/drm-is-toxic-to-culture/index.htm">http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2010/10/drm-is-toxic-to-culture/index.htm</a>
 869 om hva som ville være konsekvensen hvis digitale avspillingssperrer
 870 (DRM) fungerte.  Det gjør de naturligvis ikke teknisk - det er jo
 871 derfor de må ha totalitære juridiske beskyttelsesmekanismer på plass,
 872 men det er skremmende hva samfunnet tillater og NRK er med på å bygge
 873 opp under.</p>
 874 </blockquote></p>
 875
 876 <p>Ca. 20 minutter senere får jeg følgende epost fra Anders Hofseth i
 877 NRKBeta:</p>
 878
 879 <p><blockquote>
 880 <p>From: Anders Hofseth &lt;XXX@gmail.com>
 881 <br>To: "pere@hungry.com" &lt;pere@hungry.com>
 882 <br>Cc: Eirik Solheim &lt;XXX@gmail.com>, Jon Ståle Carlsen &lt;XXX@gmail.com>, Henrik Lied &lt;XXX@gmail.com>
 883 <br>Subject: Re: [NRKbeta] Kommentar: "Bakom Blindpassasjer: del 1"
 884 <br>Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 07:58:44 +0200</p>
 885
 886 <p>Hei Petter.
 887 <br>Det du forsøker dra igang er egentlig en interessant diskusjon,
 888 men om vi skal kjøre den i kommentarfeltet her, vil vi kunne bli bedt
 889 om å fjerne blindpassasjer fra nett- tv og det vil heller ikke bli
 890 særlig lett å klarere ut noe annet arkivmateriale på lang tid.</p>
 891
 892 <p>Dette er en situasjon NRKbeta ikke ønsker, så kommentaren er
 893 fjernet og den delen av diskusjonen er avsluttet på nrkbeta, vi antar
 894 konsekvensene vi beskriver ikke er noe du ønsker heller...</p>
 895
 896 <p>Med hilsen,
 897 <br>-anders</p>
 898
 899 <p>Ring meg om noe er uklart: 95XXXXXXX</p>
 900 </blockquote></p>
 901
 902 <p>Ble så fascinert over denne holdningen, at jeg forfattet og sendte
 903 over følgende svar.  I og med at debatten er fjernet fra NRK Betas
 904 kommentarfelt, så velger jeg å publisere her på bloggen min i stedet.
 905 Har fjernet epostadresser og telefonnummer til de involverte, for å
 906 unngå at de tiltrekker seg uønskede direkte kontaktforsøk.</p>
 907
 908 <p><blockquote>
 909 <p>From: Petter Reinholdtsen &lt;pere@hungry.com>
 910 <br>To: Anders Hofseth &lt;XXX@gmail.com>
 911 <br>Cc: Eirik Solheim &lt;XXX@gmail.com>,
 912 <br>        Jon Ståle Carlsen &lt;XXX@gmail.com>,
 913 <br>        Henrik Lied &lt;XXX@gmail.com>
 914 <br>Subject: Re: [NRKbeta] Kommentar: "Bakom Blindpassasjer: del 1"
 915 <br>Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 08:24:34 +0200</p>
 916
 917 <p>[Anders Hofseth]
 918 <br>> Hei Petter.</p>
 919
 920 <p>Hei.</p>
 921
 922 <p>> Det du forsøker dra igang er egentlig en interessant diskusjon, men
 923 <br>> om vi skal kjøre den i kommentarfeltet her, vil vi kunne bli bedt om
 924 <br>> å fjerne blindpassasjer fra nett- tv og det vil heller ikke bli
 925 <br>> særlig lett å klarere ut noe annet arkivmateriale på lang tid.</p>
 926
 927 <p>Godt å se at du er enig i at dette er en interessant diskusjon.  Den
 928 vil nok fortsette en stund til.  :)</p>
 929
 930 <p>Må innrømme at jeg synes det er merkelig å lese at dere i NRK med
 931 vitende og vilje ønsker å forlede rettighetshaverne for å kunne
 932 fortsette å legge ut arkivmateriale.</p>
 933
 934 <p>Kommentarer og diskusjoner i bloggene til NRK Beta påvirker jo ikke
 935 faktum, som er at streaming er det samme som nedlasting, og at innhold
 936 som er lagt ut på nett kan lagres lokalt for avspilling når en ønsker
 937 det.</p>
 938
 939 <p>Det du sier er jo at klarering av arkivmateriale for publisering på
 940 web krever at en holder faktum skjult fra debattfeltet på NRKBeta.
 941 Det er ikke et argument som holder vann. :)</p>
 942
 943 <p>> Dette er en situasjon NRKbeta ikke ønsker, så kommentaren er fjernet
 944 <br>> og den delen av diskusjonen er avsluttet på nrkbeta, vi antar
 945 <br>> konsekvensene vi beskriver ikke er noe du ønsker heller...</p>
 946
 947 <p>Personlig ønsker jeg at NRK skal slutte å stikke hodet i sanden og
 948 heller være åpne på hvordan virkeligheten fungerer, samt ta opp kampen
 949 mot de som vil låse kulturen inne.  Jeg synes det er en skam at NRK
 950 godtar å forlede publikum.  Ville heller at NRK krever at innhold som
 951 skal sendes skal være uten bruksbegresninger og kan publiseres i
 952 formater som heller ikke har bruksbegresninger (bruksbegresningene til
 953 H.264 burde få varselbjellene i NRK til å ringe).</p>
 954
 955 <p>At NRK er med på DRM-tåkeleggingen og at det kommer feilaktive
 956 påstander om at "streaming beskytter mot nedlasting" som bare er egnet
 957 til å bygge opp om en myte som er skadelig for samfunnet som helhet.</p>
 958
 959 <p>Anbefaler &lt;URL:<a href="http://webmink.com/2010/09/03/h-264-and-foss/">http://webmink.com/2010/09/03/h-264-and-foss/</a>> og en
 960 titt på
 961 &lt;URL: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Terms_of_use_for_video_produced_by_a_Canon_IXUS_130_digital_camera.html">http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Terms_of_use_for_video_produced_by_a_Canon_IXUS_130_digital_camera.html</a> >.
 962 for å se hva slags bruksbegresninger H.264 innebærer.</p>
 963
 964 <p>Hvis dette innebærer at NRK må være åpne med at arkivmaterialet ikke
 965 kan brukes før rettighetshaverene også innser at de er med på å skade
 966 samfunnets kultur og kollektive hukommelse, så får en i hvert fall
 967 synliggjort konsekvensene og antagelig mer flammer på en debatt som er
 968 langt på overtid.</p>
 969
 970 <p>> Ring meg om noe er uklart: XXX</p>
 971
 972 <p>Intet uklart, men ikke imponert over måten dere håndterer debatten på.
 973 Hadde du i stedet kommet med et tilsvar i kommentarfeltet der en
 974 gjorde det klart at blindpassasjer-blogpostingen ikke var riktig sted
 975 for videre diskusjon hadde dere i mine øyne kommet fra det med
 976 ryggraden på plass.</p>
 977
 978 <p>PS: Interessant å se at NRK-ansatte ikke bruker NRK-epostadresser.</p>
 979
 980 <p>Som en liten avslutning, her er noen litt morsomme innslag om temaet.
 981 &lt;URL: <a href="http://www.archive.org/details/CopyingIsNotTheft">http://www.archive.org/details/CopyingIsNotTheft</a> > og
 982 &lt;URL: <a href="http://patentabsurdity.com/">http://patentabsurdity.com/</a> > hadde vært noe å kringkaste på
 983 NRK1. :)</p>
 984
 985 <p>Vennlig hilsen,
 986 <br>--
 987 <br>Petter Reinholdtsen</p>
 988
 989  </div>
 990  <div class="tags">
 991
 992
 993
 994   Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/opphavsrett">opphavsrett</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/web">web</a>.
 995
 996  </div>
 997 </div>
 998 <div class="padding"></div>
 999
1000 <div class="entry">
1001  <div class="title">
1002  <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Officeshots_still_going_strong.html">Officeshots still going strong</a>
1003  </div>
1004  <div class="date">
1005   2010-12-25 09:40
1006  </div>
1007
1008  <div class="body">
1009
1010 <p>Half a year ago I
1011 <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Officeshots_taking_shape.html">wrote
1012 a bit</a> about <a href="http://www.officeshots.org/">OfficeShots</a>,
1013 a web service to allow anyone to test how ODF documents are handled by
1014 the different programs reading and writing the ODF format.</p>
1015
1016 <p>I just had a look at the service, and it seem to be going strong.
1017 Very interesting to see the results reported in the gallery, how
1018 different Office implementations handle different ODF features.  Sad
1019 to see that KOffice was not doing it very well, and happy to see that
1020 LibreOffice has been tested already (but sadly not listed as a option
1021 for OfficeShots users yet).  I am glad to see that the ODF community
1022 got such a great test tool available.</p>
1023
1024  </div>
1025  <div class="tags">
1026
1027
1028
1029   Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
1030
1031  </div>
1032 </div>
1033 <div class="padding"></div>
1034
1035 <div class="entry">
1036  <div class="title">
1037  <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/The_reply_from_Edgar_Villanueva_to_Microsoft_in_Peru.html">The reply from Edgar Villanueva to Microsoft in Peru</a>
1038  </div>
1039  <div class="date">
1040   2010-12-25 10:50
1041  </div>
1042
1043  <div class="body">
1044
1045 <p>A few days ago
1046 <a href="http://www.idg.no/computerworld/article189879.ece">an
1047 article</a> in the Norwegian Computerworld magazine about how version
1048 2.0 of
1049 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Interoperability_Framework">European
1050 Interoperability Framework</a> has been successfully lobbied by the
1051 proprietary software industry to remove the focus on free software.
1052 Nothing very surprising there, given
1053 <a href="http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/03/29/2115235/Open-Source-Open-Standards-Under-Attack-In-Europe">earlier
1054 reports</a> on how Microsoft and others have stacked the committees in
1055 this work.  But I find this very sad.   The definition of
1056 <a href="http://www.nuug.no/dokumenter/standard-presse-def-200506.txt">an
1057 open standard from version 1</a> was very good, and something I
1058 believe should be used also in the future, alongside
1059 <a href="http://www.digistan.org/open-standard:definition">the
1060 definition from Digistan</A>.  Version 2 have removed the open
1061 standard definition from its content.</p>
1062
1063 <p>Anyway, the news reminded me of the great reply sent by Dr. Edgar
1064 Villanueva, congressman in Peru at the time, to Microsoft as a reply
1065 to Microsofts attack on his proposal regarding the use of free software
1066 in the public sector in Peru.  As the text was not available from a
1067 few of the URLs where it used to be available, I copy it here from
1068 <a href="http://gnuwin.epfl.ch/articles/en/reponseperou/villanueva_to_ms.html">my
1069 source</a> to ensure it is available also in the future.  Some
1070 background information about that story is available in
1071 <a href="http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6099">an article</a> from
1072 Linux Journal in 2002.</p>
1073
1074 <blockquote>
1075 <p>Lima, 8th of April, 2002<br>
1076 To: Señor JUAN ALBERTO GONZÁLEZ<br>
1077 General Manager of Microsoft Perú</p>
1078
1079 <p>Dear Sir:</p>
1080
1081 <p>First of all, I thank you for your letter of March 25, 2002 in which you state the official position of Microsoft relative to Bill Number 1609, Free Software in Public Administration, which is indubitably inspired by the desire for Peru to find a suitable place in the global technological context. In the same spirit, and convinced that we will find the best solutions through an exchange of clear and open ideas, I will take this opportunity to reply to the commentaries included in your letter.</p>
1082
1083 <p>While acknowledging that opinions such as yours constitute a significant contribution, it would have been even more worthwhile for me if, rather than formulating objections of a general nature (which we will analyze in detail later) you had gathered solid arguments for the advantages that proprietary software could bring to the Peruvian State, and to its citizens in general, since this would have allowed a more enlightening exchange in respect of each of our positions.</p>
1084
1085 <p>With the aim of creating an orderly debate, we will assume that what you call "open source software" is what the Bill defines as "free software", since there exists software for which the source code is distributed together with the program, but which does not fall within the definition established by the Bill; and that what you call "commercial software" is what the Bill defines as "proprietary" or "unfree", given that there exists free software which is sold in the market for a price like any other good or service.</p>
1086
1087 <p>It is also necessary to make it clear that the aim of the Bill we are discussing is not directly related to the amount of direct savings that can by made by using free software in state institutions. That is in any case a marginal aggregate value, but in no way is it the chief focus of the Bill. The basic principles which inspire the Bill are linked to the basic guarantees of a state of law, such as:</p>
1088
1089 <p>
1090 <ul>
1091 <li>Free access to public information by the citizen. </li>
1092 <li>Permanence of public data. </li>
1093 <li>Security of the State and citizens.</li>
1094 </ul>
1095 </p>
1096
1097 <p>To guarantee the free access of citizens to public information, it is indispensable that the encoding of data is not tied to a single provider. The use of standard and open formats gives a guarantee of this free access, if necessary through the creation of compatible free software.</p>
1098
1099 <p>To guarantee the permanence of public data, it is necessary that the usability and maintenance of the software does not depend on the goodwill of the suppliers, or on the monopoly conditions imposed by them. For this reason the State needs systems the development of which can be guaranteed due to the availability of the source code.</p>
1100
1101 <p>To guarantee national security or the security of the State, it is indispensable to be able to rely on systems without elements which allow control from a distance or the undesired transmission of information to third parties. Systems with source code freely accessible to the public are required to allow their inspection by the State itself, by the citizens, and by a large number of independent experts throughout the world. Our proposal brings further security, since the knowledge of the source code will eliminate the growing number of programs with *spy code*. </p>
1102
1103 <p>In the same way, our proposal strengthens the security of the citizens, both in their role as legitimate owners of information managed by the state, and in their role as consumers. In this second case, by allowing the growth of a widespread availability of free software not containing *spy code* able to put at risk privacy and individual freedoms.</p>
1104
1105 <p>In this sense, the Bill is limited to establishing the conditions under which the state bodies will obtain software in the future, that is, in a way compatible with these basic principles.</p>
1106
1107
1108 <p>From reading the Bill it will be clear that once passed:<br>
1109 <li>the law does not forbid the production of proprietary software</li>
1110 <li>the law does not forbid the sale of proprietary software</li>
1111 <li>the law does not specify which concrete software to use</li>
1112 <li>the law does not dictate the supplier from whom software will be bought</li>
1113 <li>the law does not limit the terms under which a software product can be licensed.</li>
1114
1115 </p>
1116
1117 <p>What the Bill does express clearly, is that, for software to be acceptable for the state it is not enough that it is technically capable of fulfilling a task, but that further the contractual conditions must satisfy a series of requirements regarding the license, without which the State cannot guarantee the citizen adequate processing of his data, watching over its integrity, confidentiality, and accessibility throughout time, as these are very critical aspects for its normal functioning.</p>
1118
1119 <p>We agree, Mr. Gonzalez, that information and communication technology have a significant impact on the quality of life of the citizens (whether it be positive or negative). We surely also agree that the basic values I have pointed out above are fundamental in a democratic state like Peru. So we are very interested to know of any other way of guaranteeing these principles, other than through the use of free software in the terms defined by the Bill.</p>
1120
1121 <p>As for the observations you have made, we will now go on to analyze them in detail:</p>
1122
1123 <p>Firstly, you point out that: "1. The bill makes it compulsory for all public bodies to use only free software, that is to say open source software, which breaches the principles of equality before the law, that of non-discrimination and the right of free private enterprise, freedom of industry and of contract, protected by the constitution."</p>
1124
1125 <p>This understanding is in error. The Bill in no way affects the rights you list; it limits itself entirely to establishing conditions for the use of software on the part of state institutions, without in any way meddling in private sector transactions. It is a well established principle that the State does not enjoy the wide spectrum of contractual freedom of the private sector, as it is limited in its actions precisely by the requirement for transparency of public acts; and in this sense, the preservation of the greater common interest must prevail when legislating on the matter.</p>
1126
1127 <p>The Bill protects equality under the law, since no natural or legal person is excluded from the right of offering these goods to the State under the conditions defined in the Bill and without more limitations than those established by the Law of State Contracts and Purchasing (T.U.O. by Supreme Decree No. 012-2001-PCM).</p>
1128
1129 <p>The Bill does not introduce any discrimination whatever, since it only establishes *how* the goods have to be provided (which is a state power) and not *who* has to provide them (which would effectively be discriminatory, if restrictions based on national origin, race religion, ideology, sexual preference etc. were imposed). On the contrary, the Bill is decidedly antidiscriminatory. This is so because by defining with no room for doubt the conditions for the provision of software, it prevents state bodies from using software which has a license including discriminatory conditions.</p>
1130
1131 <p>It should be obvious from the preceding two paragraphs that the Bill does not harm free private enterprise, since the latter can always choose under what conditions it will produce software; some of these will be acceptable to the State, and others will not be since they contradict the guarantee of the basic principles listed above. This free initiative is of course compatible with the freedom of industry and freedom of contract (in the limited form in which the State can exercise the latter). Any private subject can produce software under the conditions which the State requires, or can refrain from doing so. Nobody is forced to adopt a model of production, but if they wish to provide software to the State, they must provide the mechanisms which guarantee the basic principles, and which are those described in the Bill.</p>
1132
1133 <p>By way of an example: nothing in the text of the Bill would prevent your company offering the State bodies an office "suite", under the conditions defined in the Bill and setting the price that you consider satisfactory. If you did not, it would not be due to restrictions imposed by the law, but to business decisions relative to the method of commercializing your products, decisions with which the State is not involved.</p>
1134
1135 <p>To continue; you note that:" 2. The bill, by making the use of open source software compulsory, would establish discriminatory and non competitive practices in the contracting and purchasing by public bodies..."</p>
1136
1137 <p>This statement is just a reiteration of the previous one, and so the response can be found above. However, let us concern ourselves for a moment with your comment regarding "non-competitive ... practices."</p>
1138
1139 <p>Of course, in defining any kind of purchase, the buyer sets conditions which relate to the proposed use of the good or service. From the start, this excludes certain manufacturers from the possibility of competing, but does not exclude them "a priori", but rather based on a series of principles determined by the autonomous will of the purchaser, and so the process takes place in conformance with the law. And in the Bill it is established that *no one* is excluded from competing as far as he guarantees the fulfillment of the basic principles.</p>
1140
1141 <p>Furthermore, the Bill *stimulates* competition, since it tends to generate a supply of software with better conditions of usability, and to better existing work, in a model of continuous improvement.</p>
1142
1143 <p>On the other hand, the central aspect of competivity is the chance to provide better choices to the consumer. Now, it is impossible to ignore the fact that marketing does not play a neutral role when the product is offered on the market (since accepting the opposite would lead one to suppose that firms' expenses in marketing lack any sense), and that therefore a significant expense under this heading can influence the decisions of the purchaser. This influence of marketing is in large measure reduced by the bill that we are backing, since the choice within the framework proposed is based on the *technical merits* of the product and not on the effort put into commercialization by the producer; in this sense, competitiveness is increased, since the smallest software producer can compete on equal terms with the most powerful corporations.</p>
1144
1145 <p>It is necessary to stress that there is no position more anti-competitive than that of the big software producers, which frequently abuse their dominant position, since in innumerable cases they propose as a solution to problems raised by users: "update your software to the new version" (at the user's expense, naturally); furthermore, it is common to find arbitrary cessation of technical help for products, which, in the provider's judgment alone, are "old"; and so, to receive any kind of technical assistance, the user finds himself forced to migrate to new versions (with non-trivial costs, especially as changes in hardware platform are often involved). And as the whole infrastructure is based on proprietary data formats, the user stays "trapped" in the need to continue using products from the same supplier, or to make the huge effort to change to another environment (probably also proprietary).</p>
1146
1147 <p>You add: "3. So, by compelling the State to favor a business model based entirely on open source, the bill would only discourage the local and international manufacturing companies, which are the ones which really undertake important expenditures, create a significant number of direct and indirect jobs, as well as contributing to the GNP, as opposed to a model of open source software which tends to have an ever weaker economic impact, since it mainly creates jobs in the service sector."</p>
1148
1149 <p>I do not agree with your statement. Partly because of what you yourself point out in paragraph 6 of your letter, regarding the relative weight of services in the context of software use. This contradiction alone would invalidate your position. The service model, adopted by a large number of companies in the software industry, is much larger in economic terms, and with a tendency to increase, than the licensing of programs.</p>
1150
1151 <p>On the other hand, the private sector of the economy has the widest possible freedom to choose the economic model which best suits its interests, even if this freedom of choice is often obscured subliminally by the disproportionate expenditure on marketing by the producers of proprietary software.</p>
1152
1153 <p>In addition, a reading of your opinion would lead to the conclusion that the State market is crucial and essential for the proprietary software industry, to such a point that the choice made by the State in this bill would completely eliminate the market for these firms. If that is true, we can deduce that the State must be subsidizing the proprietary software industry. In the unlikely event that this were true, the State would have the right to apply the subsidies in the area it considered of greatest social value; it is undeniable, in this improbable hypothesis, that if the State decided to subsidize software, it would have to do so choosing the free over the proprietary, considering its social effect and the rational use of taxpayers money.</p>
1154
1155 <p>In respect of the jobs generated by proprietary software in countries like ours, these mainly concern technical tasks of little aggregate value; at the local level, the technicians who provide support for proprietary software produced by transnational companies do not have the possibility of fixing bugs, not necessarily for lack of technical capability or of talent, but because they do not have access to the source code to fix it. With free software one creates more technically qualified employment and a framework of free competence where success is only tied to the ability to offer good technical support and quality of service, one stimulates the market, and one increases the shared fund of knowledge, opening up alternatives to generate services of greater total value and a higher quality level, to the benefit of all involved: producers, service organizations, and consumers.</p>
1156
1157 <p>It is a common phenomenon in developing countries that local software industries obtain the majority of their takings in the service sector, or in the creation of "ad hoc" software. Therefore, any negative impact that the application of the Bill might have in this sector will be more than compensated by a growth in demand for services (as long as these are carried out to high quality standards). If the transnational software companies decide not to compete under these new rules of the game, it is likely that they will undergo some decrease in takings in terms of payment for licenses; however, considering that these firms continue to allege that much of the software used by the State has been illegally copied, one can see that the impact will not be very serious. Certainly, in any case their fortune will be determined by market laws, changes in which cannot be avoided; many firms traditionally associated with proprietary software have already set out on the road (supported by copious expense) of providing services associated with free software, which shows that the models are not mutually exclusive.</p>
1158
1159 <p>With this bill the State is deciding that it needs to preserve certain fundamental values. And it is deciding this based on its sovereign power, without affecting any of the constitutional guarantees. If these values could be guaranteed without having to choose a particular economic model, the effects of the law would be even more beneficial. In any case, it should be clear that the State does not choose an economic model; if it happens that there only exists one economic model capable of providing software which provides the basic guarantee of these principles, this is because of historical circumstances, not because of an arbitrary choice of a given model.</p>
1160
1161 <p>Your letter continues: "4. The bill imposes the use of open source software without considering the dangers that this can bring from the point of view of security, guarantee, and possible violation of the intellectual property rights of third parties."</p>
1162
1163 <p>Alluding in an abstract way to "the dangers this can bring", without specifically mentioning a single one of these supposed dangers, shows at the least some lack of knowledge of the topic. So, allow me to enlighten you on these points.</p>
1164
1165 <p>On security:</p>
1166
1167 <p>National security has already been mentioned in general terms in the initial discussion of the basic principles of the bill. In more specific terms, relative to the security of the software itself, it is well known that all software (whether proprietary or free) contains errors or "bugs" (in programmers' slang). But it is also well known that the bugs in free software are fewer, and are fixed much more quickly, than in proprietary software. It is not in vain that numerous public bodies responsible for the IT security of state systems in developed countries require the use of free software for the same conditions of security and efficiency.</p>
1168
1169 <p>What is impossible to prove is that proprietary software is more secure than free, without the public and open inspection of the scientific community and users in general. This demonstration is impossible because the model of proprietary software itself prevents this analysis, so that any guarantee of security is based only on promises of good intentions (biased, by any reckoning) made by the producer itself, or its contractors.</p>
1170
1171 <p>It should be remembered that in many cases, the licensing conditions include Non-Disclosure clauses which prevent the user from publicly revealing security flaws found in the licensed proprietary product.</p>
1172
1173 <p>In respect of the guarantee:</p>
1174
1175 A<p>s you know perfectly well, or could find out by reading the "End User License Agreement" of the products you license, in the great majority of cases the guarantees are limited to replacement of the storage medium in case of defects, but in no case is compensation given for direct or indirect damages, loss of profits, etc... If as a result of a security bug in one of your products, not fixed in time by yourselves, an attacker managed to compromise crucial State systems, what guarantees, reparations and compensation would your company make in accordance with your licensing conditions? The guarantees of proprietary software, inasmuch as programs are delivered ``AS IS'', that is, in the state in which they are, with no additional responsibility of the provider in respect of function, in no way differ from those normal with free software.</p>
1176
1177 <p>On Intellectual Property:</p>
1178
1179 <p>Questions of intellectual property fall outside the scope of this bill, since they are covered by specific other laws. The model of free software in no way implies ignorance of these laws, and in fact the great majority of free software is covered by copyright. In reality, the inclusion of this question in your observations shows your confusion in respect of the legal framework in which free software is developed. The inclusion of the intellectual property of others in works claimed as one's own is not a practice that has been noted in the free software community; whereas, unfortunately, it has been in the area of proprietary software. As an example, the condemnation by the Commercial Court of Nanterre, France, on 27th September 2001 of Microsoft Corp. to a penalty of 3 million francs in damages and interest, for violation of intellectual property (piracy, to use the unfortunate term that your firm commonly uses in its publicity).</p>
1180
1181 <p>You go on to say that: "The bill uses the concept of open source software incorrectly, since it does not necessarily imply that the software is free or of zero cost, and so arrives at mistaken conclusions regarding State savings, with no cost-benefit analysis to validate its position."</p>
1182
1183 <p>This observation is wrong; in principle, freedom and lack of cost are orthogonal concepts: there is software which is proprietary and charged for (for example, MS Office), software which is proprietary and free of charge (MS Internet Explorer), software which is free and charged for (Red Hat, SuSE etc GNU/Linux distributions), software which is free and not charged for (Apache, Open Office, Mozilla), and even software which can be licensed in a range of combinations (MySQL).</p>
1184
1185 <p>Certainly free software is not necessarily free of charge. And the text of the bill does not state that it has to be so, as you will have noted after reading it. The definitions included in the Bill state clearly *what* should be considered free software, at no point referring to freedom from charges. Although the possibility of savings in payments for proprietary software licenses are mentioned, the foundations of the bill clearly refer to the fundamental guarantees to be preserved and to the stimulus to local technological development. Given that a democratic State must support these principles, it has no other choice than to use software with publicly available source code, and to exchange information only in standard formats.</p>
1186
1187 <p>If the State does not use software with these characteristics, it will be weakening basic republican principles. Luckily, free software also implies lower total costs; however, even given the hypothesis (easily disproved) that it was more expensive than proprietary software, the simple existence of an effective free software tool for a particular IT function would oblige the State to use it; not by command of this Bill, but because of the basic principles we enumerated at the start, and which arise from the very essence of the lawful democratic State.</p>
1188
1189 <p>You continue: "6. It is wrong to think that Open Source Software is free of charge. Research by the Gartner Group (an important investigator of the technological market recognized at world level) has shown that the cost of purchase of software (operating system and applications) is only 8% of the total cost which firms and institutions take on for a rational and truly beneficial use of the technology. The other 92% consists of: installation costs, enabling, support, maintenance, administration, and down-time."</p>
1190
1191 <p>This argument repeats that already given in paragraph 5 and partly contradicts paragraph 3. For the sake of brevity we refer to the comments on those paragraphs. However, allow me to point out that your conclusion is logically false: even if according to Gartner Group the cost of software is on average only 8% of the total cost of use, this does not in any way deny the existence of software which is free of charge, that is, with a licensing cost of zero.</p>
1192
1193 <p>In addition, in this paragraph you correctly point out that the service components and losses due to down-time make up the largest part of the total cost of software use, which, as you will note, contradicts your statement regarding the small value of services suggested in paragraph 3. Now the use of free software contributes significantly to reduce the remaining life-cycle costs. This reduction in the costs of installation, support etc. can be noted in several areas: in the first place, the competitive service model of free software, support and maintenance for which can be freely contracted out to a range of suppliers competing on the grounds of quality and low cost. This is true for installation, enabling, and support, and in large part for maintenance. In the second place, due to the reproductive characteristics of the model, maintenance carried out for an application is easily replicable, without incurring large costs (that is, without paying more than once for the same thing) since modifications, if one wishes, can be incorporated in the common fund of knowledge. Thirdly, the huge costs caused by non-functioning software ("blue screens of death", malicious code such as virus, worms, and trojans, exceptions, general protection faults and other well-known problems) are reduced considerably by using more stable software; and it is well known that one of the most notable virtues of free software is its stability.</p>
1194
1195 <p>You further state that: "7. One of the arguments behind the bill is the supposed freedom from costs of open-source software, compared with the costs of commercial software, without taking into account the fact that there exist types of volume licensing which can be highly advantageous for the State, as has happened in other countries."</p>
1196
1197 <p>I have already pointed out that what is in question is not the cost of the software but the principles of freedom of information, accessibility, and security. These arguments have been covered extensively in the preceding paragraphs to which I would refer you.</p>
1198
1199 <p>On the other hand, there certainly exist types of volume licensing (although unfortunately proprietary software does not satisfy the basic principles). But as you correctly pointed out in the immediately preceding paragraph of your letter, they only manage to reduce the impact of a component which makes up no more than 8% of the total.</p>
1200
1201 <p>You continue: "8. In addition, the alternative adopted by the bill (I) is clearly more expensive, due to the high costs of software migration, and (II) puts at risk compatibility and interoperability of the IT platforms within the State, and between the State and the private sector, given the hundreds of versions of open source software on the market."</p>
1202
1203 <p>Let us analyze your statement in two parts. Your first argument, that migration implies high costs, is in reality an argument in favor of the Bill. Because the more time goes by, the more difficult migration to another technology will become; and at the same time, the security risks associated with proprietary software will continue to increase. In this way, the use of proprietary systems and formats will make the State ever more dependent on specific suppliers. Once a policy of using free software has been established (which certainly, does imply some cost) then on the contrary migration from one system to another becomes very simple, since all data is stored in open formats. On the other hand, migration to an open software context implies no more costs than migration between two different proprietary software contexts, which invalidates your argument completely.</p>
1204
1205 <p>The second argument refers to "problems in interoperability of the IT platforms within the State, and between the State and the private sector" This statement implies a certain lack of knowledge of the way in which free software is built, which does not maximize the dependence of the user on a particular platform, as normally happens in the realm of proprietary software. Even when there are multiple free software distributions, and numerous programs which can be used for the same function, interoperability is guaranteed as much by the use of standard formats, as required by the bill, as by the possibility of creating interoperable software given the availability of the source code.</p>
1206
1207 <p>You then say that: "9. The majority of open source code does not offer adequate levels of service nor the guarantee from recognized manufacturers of high productivity on the part of the users, which has led various public organizations to retract their decision to go with an open source software solution and to use commercial software in its place."</p>
1208
1209 <p>This observation is without foundation. In respect of the guarantee, your argument was rebutted in the response to paragraph 4. In respect of support services, it is possible to use free software without them (just as also happens with proprietary software), but anyone who does need them can obtain support separately, whether from local firms or from international corporations, again just as in the case of proprietary software.</p>
1210
1211 <p>On the other hand, it would contribute greatly to our analysis if you could inform us about free software projects *established* in public bodies which have already been abandoned in favor of proprietary software. We know of a good number of cases where the opposite has taken place, but not know of any where what you describe has taken place.</p>
1212
1213 <p>You continue by observing that: "10. The bill discourages the creativity of the Peruvian software industry, which invoices 40 million US$/year, exports 4 million US$ (10th in ranking among non-traditional exports, more than handicrafts) and is a source of highly qualified employment. With a law that encourages the use of open source, software programmers lose their intellectual property rights and their main source of payment."</p>
1214
1215 <p>It is clear enough that nobody is forced to commercialize their code as free software. The only thing to take into account is that if it is not free software, it cannot be sold to the public sector. This is not in any case the main market for the national software industry. We covered some questions referring to the influence of the Bill on the generation of employment which would be both highly technically qualified and in better conditions for competition above, so it seems unnecessary to insist on this point.</p>
1216
1217 <p>What follows in your statement is incorrect. On the one hand, no author of free software loses his intellectual property rights, unless he expressly wishes to place his work in the public domain. The free software movement has always been very respectful of intellectual property, and has generated widespread public recognition of its authors. Names like those of Richard Stallman, Linus Torvalds, Guido van Rossum, Larry Wall, Miguel de Icaza, Andrew Tridgell, Theo de Raadt, Andrea Arcangeli, Bruce Perens, Darren Reed, Alan Cox, Eric Raymond, and many others, are recognized world-wide for their contributions to the development of software that is used today by millions of people throughout the world. On the other hand, to say that the rewards for authors rights make up the main source of payment of Peruvian programmers is in any case a guess, in particular since there is no proof to this effect, nor a demonstration of how the use of free software by the State would influence these payments.</p>
1218
1219 <p>You go on to say that: "11. Open source software, since it can be distributed without charge, does not allow the generation of income for its developers through exports. In this way, the multiplier effect of the sale of software to other countries is weakened, and so in turn is the growth of the industry, while Government rules ought on the contrary to stimulate local industry."</p>
1220
1221 <p>This statement shows once again complete ignorance of the mechanisms of and market for free software. It tries to claim that the market of sale of non- exclusive rights for use (sale of licenses) is the only possible one for the software industry, when you yourself pointed out several paragraphs above that it is not even the most important one. The incentives that the bill offers for the growth of a supply of better qualified professionals, together with the increase in experience that working on a large scale with free software within the State will bring for Peruvian technicians, will place them in a highly competitive position to offer their services abroad.</p>
1222
1223 <p>You then state that: "12. In the Forum, the use of open source software in education was discussed, without mentioning the complete collapse of this initiative in a country like Mexico, where precisely the State employees who founded the project now state that open source software did not make it possible to offer a learning experience to pupils in the schools, did not take into account the capability at a national level to give adequate support to the platform, and that the software did not and does not allow for the levels of platform integration that now exist in schools."</p>
1224
1225 <p>In fact Mexico has gone into reverse with the Red Escolar (Schools Network) project. This is due precisely to the fact that the driving forces behind the Mexican project used license costs as their main argument, instead of the other reasons specified in our project, which are far more essential. Because of this conceptual mistake, and as a result of the lack of effective support from the SEP (Secretary of State for Public Education), the assumption was made that to implant free software in schools it would be enough to drop their software budget and send them a CD ROM with Gnu/Linux instead. Of course this failed, and it couldn't have been otherwise, just as school laboratories fail when they use proprietary software and have no budget for implementation and maintenance. That's exactly why our bill is not limited to making the use of free software mandatory, but recognizes the need to create a viable migration plan, in which the State undertakes the technical transition in an orderly way in order to then enjoy the advantages of free software.</p>
1226
1227 <p>You end with a rhetorical question: "13. If open source software satisfies all the requirements of State bodies, why do you need a law to adopt it? Shouldn't it be the market which decides freely which products give most benefits or value?"</p>
1228
1229 <p>We agree that in the private sector of the economy, it must be the market that decides which products to use, and no state interference is permissible there. However, in the case of the public sector, the reasoning is not the same: as we have already established, the state archives, handles, and transmits information which does not belong to it, but which is entrusted to it by citizens, who have no alternative under the rule of law. As a counterpart to this legal requirement, the State must take extreme measures to safeguard the integrity, confidentiality, and accessibility of this information. The use of proprietary software raises serious doubts as to whether these requirements can be fulfilled, lacks conclusive evidence in this respect, and so is not suitable for use in the public sector.</p>
1230
1231 <p>The need for a law is based, firstly, on the realization of the fundamental principles listed above in the specific area of software; secondly, on the fact that the State is not an ideal homogeneous entity, but made up of multiple bodies with varying degrees of autonomy in decision making. Given that it is inappropriate to use proprietary software, the fact of establishing these rules in law will prevent the personal discretion of any state employee from putting at risk the information which belongs to citizens. And above all, because it constitutes an up-to-date reaffirmation in relation to the means of management and communication of information used today, it is based on the republican principle of openness to the public.</p>
1232
1233 <p>In conformance with this universally accepted principle, the citizen has the right to know all information held by the State and not covered by well- founded declarations of secrecy based on law. Now, software deals with information and is itself information. Information in a special form, capable of being interpreted by a machine in order to execute actions, but crucial information all the same because the citizen has a legitimate right to know, for example, how his vote is computed or his taxes calculated. And for that he must have free access to the source code and be able to prove to his satisfaction the programs used for electoral computations or calculation of his taxes.</p>
1234
1235 <p>I wish you the greatest respect, and would like to repeat that my office will always be open for you to expound your point of view to whatever level of detail you consider suitable.</p>
1236
1237 <p>Cordially,<br>
1238 DR. EDGAR DAVID VILLANUEVA NUÑEZ<br>
1239 Congressman of the Republic of Perú.</p>
1240 </blockquote>
1241
1242  </div>
1243  <div class="tags">
1244
1245
1246
1247   Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>.
1248
1249  </div>
1250 </div>
1251 <div class="padding"></div>
1252
1253 <div class="entry">
1254  <div class="title">
1255  <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Is_Ogg_Theora_a_free_and_open_standard_.html">Is Ogg Theora a free and open standard?</a>
1256  </div>
1257  <div class="date">
1258   2010-12-25 20:25
1259  </div>
1260
1261  <div class="body">
1262
1263 <p><a href="http://www.digistan.org/open-standard:definition">The
1264 Digistan definition</a> of a free and open standard reads like this:</p>
1265
1266 <blockquote>
1267
1268 <p>The Digital Standards Organization defines free and open standard
1269 as follows:</p>
1270
1271 <ol>
1272
1273 <li>A free and open standard is immune to vendor capture at all stages
1274 in its life-cycle. Immunity from vendor capture makes it possible to
1275 freely use, improve upon, trust, and extend a standard over time.</li>
1276
1277 <li>The standard is adopted and will be maintained by a not-for-profit
1278 organisation, and its ongoing development occurs on the basis of an
1279 open decision-making procedure available to all interested
1280 parties.</li>
1281
1282 <li>The standard has been published and the standard specification
1283 document is available freely. It must be permissible to all to copy,
1284 distribute, and use it freely.</li>
1285
1286 <li>The patents possibly present on (parts of) the standard are made
1287 irrevocably available on a royalty-free basis.</li>
1288
1289 <li>There are no constraints on the re-use of the standard.</li>
1290
1291 </ol>
1292
1293 <p>The economic outcome of a free and open standard, which can be
1294 measured, is that it enables perfect competition between suppliers of
1295 products based on the standard.</p>
1296 </blockquote>
1297
1298 <p>For a while now I have tried to figure out of Ogg Theora is a free
1299 and open standard according to this definition.  Here is a short
1300 writeup of what I have been able to gather so far.  I brought up the
1301 topic on the Xiph advocacy mailing list
1302 <a href="http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/advocacy/2009-July/001632.html">in
1303 July 2009</a>, for those that want to see some background information.
1304 According to Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves and Monty Montgomery on that list
1305 the Ogg Theora specification fulfils the Digistan definition.</p>
1306
1307 <p><strong>Free from vendor capture?</strong></p>
1308
1309 <p>As far as I can see, there is no single vendor that can control the
1310 Ogg Theora specification.  It can be argued that the
1311 <a href="http://www.xiph.org/">Xiph foundation</A> is such vendor, but
1312 given that it is a non-profit foundation with the expressed goal
1313 making free and open protocols and standards available, it is not
1314 obvious that this is a real risk.  One issue with the Xiph
1315 foundation is that its inner working (as in board member list, or who
1316 control the foundation) are not easily available on the web.  I've
1317 been unable to find out who is in the foundation board, and have not
1318 seen any accounting information documenting how money is handled nor
1319 where is is spent in the foundation.  It is thus not obvious for an
1320 external observer who control The Xiph foundation, and for all I know
1321 it is possible for a single vendor to take control over the
1322 specification.  But it seem unlikely.</p>
1323
1324 <p><strong>Maintained by open not-for-profit organisation?</strong></p>
1325
1326 <p>Assuming that the Xiph foundation is the organisation its web pages
1327 claim it to be, this point is fulfilled.  If Xiph foundation is
1328 controlled by a single vendor, it isn't, but I have not found any
1329 documentation indicating this.</p>
1330
1331 <p>According to
1332 <ahref="http://media.hiof.no/diverse/fad/rapport_4.pdf">a report</a>
1333 prepared by Audun Vaaler og Børre Ludvigsen for the Norwegian
1334 government, the Xiph foundation is a non-commercial organisation and
1335 the development process is open, transparent and non-Discrimatory.
1336 Until proven otherwise, I believe it make most sense to believe the
1337 report is correct.</p>
1338
1339 <p><strong>Specification freely available?</strong></p>
1340
1341 <p>The specification for the <a href="http://www.xiph.org/ogg/doc/">Ogg
1342 container format</a> and both the
1343 <a href="http://www.xiph.org/vorbis/doc/">Vorbis</a> and
1344 <a href="http://theora.org/doc/">Theora</a> codeces are available on
1345 the web.  This are the terms in the Vorbis and Theora specification:
1346
1347 <blockquote>
1348
1349 Anyone may freely use and distribute the Ogg and [Vorbis/Theora]
1350 specifications, whether in private, public, or corporate
1351 capacity. However, the Xiph.Org Foundation and the Ogg project reserve
1352 the right to set the Ogg [Vorbis/Theora] specification and certify
1353 specification compliance.
1354
1355 </blockquote>
1356
1357 <p>The Ogg container format is specified in IETF
1358 <a href="http://www.xiph.org/ogg/doc/rfc3533.txt">RFC 3533</a>, and
1359 this is the term:<p>
1360
1361 <blockquote>
1362
1363 <p>This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
1364 others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
1365 or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and
1366 distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind,
1367 provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
1368 included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
1369 document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
1370 the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
1371 Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing
1372 Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined
1373 in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to
1374 translate it into languages other than English.</p>
1375
1376 <p>The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
1377 revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.</p>
1378 </blockquote>
1379
1380 <p>All these terms seem to allow unlimited distribution and use, an
1381 this term seem to be fulfilled.  There might be a problem with the
1382 missing permission to distribute modified versions of the text, and
1383 thus reuse it in other specifications.  Not quite sure if that is a
1384 requirement for the Digistan definition.</p>
1385
1386 <p><strong>Royalty-free?</strong></p>
1387
1388 <p>There are no known patent claims requiring royalties for the Ogg
1389 Theora format.
1390 <a href="http://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=65782">MPEG-LA</a>
1391 and
1392 <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/04/30/237238/Steve-Jobs-Hints-At-Theora-Lawsuit">Steve
1393 Jobs</a> in Apple claim to know about some patent claims (submarine
1394 patents) against the Theora format, but no-one else seem to believe
1395 them.  Both Opera Software and the Mozilla Foundation have looked into
1396 this and decided to implement Ogg Theora support in their browsers
1397 without paying any royalties.  For now the claims from MPEG-LA and
1398 Steve Jobs seem more like FUD to scare people to use the H.264 codec
1399 than any real problem with Ogg Theora.
1400
1401 <p><strong>No constraints on re-use?</strong></p>
1402
1403 <p>I am not aware of any constraints on re-use.</p>
1404
1405 <p><strong>Conclusion</strong></p>
1406
1407 <p>3 of 5 requirements seem obviously fulfilled, and the remaining 2
1408 depend on the governing structure of the Xiph foundation.  Given the
1409 background report used by the Norwegian government, I believe it is
1410 safe to assume the last two requirements are fulfilled too, but it
1411 would be nice if the Xiph foundation web site made it easier to verify
1412 this.</p>
1413
1414 <p>It would be nice to see other analysis of other specifications to
1415 see if they are free and open standards.</p>
1416
1417  </div>
1418  <div class="tags">
1419
1420
1421
1422   Tags: <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard</a>, <a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video</a>.
1423
1424  </div>
1425 </div>
1426 <div class="padding"></div>
1427
1428  <p style="text-align: right;"><a href="standard.rss"><img src="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/xml.gif" alt="RSS Feed" width="36" height="14"></a></p>
1429
1430
1431
1432
1433 <div id="sidebar">
1434
1435 <h2>Archive</h2>
1436 <ul>
1437
1438 <li>2010
1439 <ul>
1440
1441 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/01/">January (2)</a></li>
1442
1443 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/02/">February (1)</a></li>
1444
1445 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/03/">March (3)</a></li>
1446
1447 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/04/">April (3)</a></li>
1448
1449 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/05/">May (9)</a></li>
1450
1451 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/06/">June (14)</a></li>
1452
1453 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/07/">July (12)</a></li>
1454
1455 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/08/">August (13)</a></li>
1456
1457 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/09/">September (7)</a></li>
1458
1459 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/10/">October (9)</a></li>
1460
1461 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/11/">November (13)</a></li>
1462
1463 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2010/12/">December (10)</a></li>
1464
1465 </ul></li>
1466
1467 <li>2009
1468 <ul>
1469
1470 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/01/">January (8)</a></li>
1471
1472 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/02/">February (8)</a></li>
1473
1474 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/03/">March (12)</a></li>
1475
1476 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/04/">April (10)</a></li>
1477
1478 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/05/">May (9)</a></li>
1479
1480 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/06/">June (3)</a></li>
1481
1482 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/07/">July (4)</a></li>
1483
1484 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/08/">August (3)</a></li>
1485
1486 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/09/">September (1)</a></li>
1487
1488 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/10/">October (2)</a></li>
1489
1490 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/11/">November (3)</a></li>
1491
1492 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2009/12/">December (3)</a></li>
1493
1494 </ul></li>
1495
1496 <li>2008
1497 <ul>
1498
1499 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2008/11/">November (5)</a></li>
1500
1501 <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/archive/2008/12/">December (7)</a></li>
1502
1503 </ul></li>
1504
1505 </ul>
1506
1507
1508
1509 <h2>Tags</h2>
1510 <ul>
1511
1512  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/3d-printer">3d-printer (13)</a></li>
1513
1514  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/amiga">amiga (1)</a></li>
1515
1516  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/aros">aros (1)</a></li>
1517
1518  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/bitcoin">bitcoin (2)</a></li>
1519
1520  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/bootsystem">bootsystem (10)</a></li>
1521
1522  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/debian">debian (46)</a></li>
1523
1524  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/debian edu">debian edu (53)</a></li>
1525
1526  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/english">english (80)</a></li>
1527
1528  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/fiksgatami">fiksgatami (1)</a></li>
1529
1530  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/fildeling">fildeling (11)</a></li>
1531
1532  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/kart">kart (5)</a></li>
1533
1534  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/ldap">ldap (8)</a></li>
1535
1536  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/lenker">lenker (4)</a></li>
1537
1538  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/ltsp">ltsp (1)</a></li>
1539
1540  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/multimedia">multimedia (11)</a></li>
1541
1542  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/norsk">norsk (94)</a></li>
1543
1544  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/nuug">nuug (114)</a></li>
1545
1546  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/opphavsrett">opphavsrett (18)</a></li>
1547
1548  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/personvern">personvern (31)</a></li>
1549
1550  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/reprap">reprap (11)</a></li>
1551
1552  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/robot">robot (4)</a></li>
1553
1554  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/rss">rss (1)</a></li>
1555
1556  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/sikkerhet">sikkerhet (22)</a></li>
1557
1558  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/sitesummary">sitesummary (3)</a></li>
1559
1560  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/standard">standard (19)</a></li>
1561
1562  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/stavekontroll">stavekontroll (1)</a></li>
1563
1564  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/video">video (17)</a></li>
1565
1566  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/vitenskap">vitenskap (1)</a></li>
1567
1568  <li><a href="http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/tags/web">web (14)</a></li>
1569
1570 </ul>
1571
1572 </div>
1573 </body>
1574 </html>