From: Petter Reinholdtsen Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2010 13:42:25 +0000 (+0000) Subject: New post. X-Git-Url: https://pere.pagekite.me/gitweb/homepage.git/commitdiff_plain/58a41994561e591eccf11d4ac1f280db73ef6c4a?ds=sidebyside New post. --- diff --git a/blog/data/2010-12-27-open-standard.txt b/blog/data/2010-12-27-open-standard.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..19b6cf9189 --- /dev/null +++ b/blog/data/2010-12-27-open-standard.txt @@ -0,0 +1,197 @@ +Title: The many definitions of open standard +Tags: english, standard +Date: 2010-12-27 14:30 + +

One of the reasons I like the Digistan definition of +"Free and +Open Standard" is that this is a new term, and thus the meaning of +the term has been decided by Digistan. The term "Open Standard" has +become so misunderstood that it is no longer useful very when talking +about standards. One end up discussing which definition is the best +one and with such frame the only one gaining are the proponents of +de-facto standards and proprietary solutions.

+ +

But to give us an idea about the diversity of definitions of open +standards, here are a few that I know about. This list is not +complete, but can be a starting point for those that want to do a +complete survey. More definitions are available on the +wikipedia +page.

+ +

First off is my favourite, the definition from the European +Interoperability Framework version 1.0. Really sad to notice that BSA +and others has succeeded in getting it removed from version 2.0 of the +framework by stacking the committee drafting the new version with +their own people. Anyway, the definition is still available and it +include the key properties needed to make sure everyone can use a +specification on equal terms.

+ +
+ +

The following are the minimal characteristics that a specification +and its attendant documents must have in order to be considered an +open standard:

+ + +
+ +

Another one originates from by friends over at +DKUUG, who coined and gathered +support for this +definition in 2004. It even made it into the Danish parlament as +their +definition of a open standard. Another from a different part of +the Danish government is available from the wikipedia page.

+ +
+ +

En åben standard opfylder følgende krav:

+ +
    + +
  1. Veldokumenteret med den fuldstændige specifikation offentligt +tilgængelig.
    2. + +
  2. Frit implementerbar uden økonomiske, politiske eller juridiske +begrænsninger på implementation og anvendelse.
    3. + +
  3. Standardiseret og vedligeholdt i et åbent forum (en såkaldt +"standardiseringsorganisation") via en åben proces.
    4. + +
+ +
+ +

Then there is the +definition from Free Software Foundation Europe.

+ +
+ +

An Open Standard refers to a format or protocol that is

+ +
    + +
  1. subject to full public assessment and use without constraints in a +manner equally available to all parties;
    2. + +
  2. without any components or extensions that have dependencies on +formats or protocols that do not meet the definition of an Open +Standard themselves;
    3. + +
  3. free from legal or technical clauses that limit its utilisation by +any party or in any business model;
    4. + +
  4. managed and further developed independently of any single vendor +in a process open to the equal participation of competitors and third +parties;
    5. + +
  5. available in multiple complete implementations by competing +vendors, or as a complete implementation equally available to all +parties.
    6. + +
+ +
+ +

A long time ago, SUN Microsystems, now bought by Oracle, created +its +Open +Standards Checklist with a fairly detailed description.

+ +
+

Creation and Management of an Open Standard + +

+ +

Use and Licensing of an Open Standard

+ + +
+ +

It is said that one of the nice things about standards is that +there are so many of them. As you can see, the same holds true for +open standard definitions. Most of the definitions have a lot in +common, and it is not really controversial what properties a open +standard should have, but the diversity of definitions have made it +possible for those that want to avoid a level marked field and real +competition to downplay the significance of open standards. I hope we +can turn this tide by focusing on the advantages of Free and Open +Standards.