govUKopenstandards - Revision history

Kevin Marks: use discussion class, fix indents

2012-04-26T16:54:41Z

use discussion class, fix indents

Kevin Marks: Draft answers to first set of questions

2012-04-26T16:50:14Z

Draft answers to first set of questions

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:50, 26 April 2012
Line 5:		Line 5:
	* How does this definition of open standard compare to your view of what makes a standard 'open'?		* How does this definition of open standard compare to your view of what makes a standard 'open'?

			** The Microformats definition of a standard (see [[process]]) is compatible with the UK Govt version. Specifically:
			*** Microformats are collaborative and transparently maintained on this Wiki
			*** we are a forum with a process to ensure quality
			*** published, thoroughly documented and available at zero cost
			*** to be considered 'standard' (as opposed to 'draft' or 'spec' ) requires interoperating implementations (note the distinction between publishing and consuming that we make)
			*** All contributions are required to be CC0 (public domain) and will not be patented

	* What will the Government be inhibited from doing if this definition of open standards is adopted for software interoperability, data and document formats across central government?		* What will the Government be inhibited from doing if this definition of open standards is adopted for software interoperability, data and document formats across central government?

			** Data formats operate on multiple levels. There is a distinction between underlying structural form (XML, JSON, SQL HTML etc) and the vocabulary in use that defines field names and validity. A well-defined structural form can accommodate variations in vocabulary between versions cleanly. Adopting standards with a tight binding between structure and vocabulary may constrain what is transferable.

	* For businesses attempting to break into the government IT market, would this policy make things easier or more difficult – does it help to level the playing field?		* For businesses attempting to break into the government IT market, would this policy make things easier or more difficult – does it help to level the playing field?

			** It should definitely help level the playing field.

	* How would mandating open standards for use in government IT for software interoperability, data and document formats affect your organisation?		* How would mandating open standards for use in government IT for software interoperability, data and document formats affect your organisation?

			** Clearly it depends on the details of which standards and organisations are chosen. If we're a chosen standardisation organisation, it may lead to an influx of new editors and specifications, which is welcomed, but may add to contention here.

	* What effect would this policy have on improving value for money in the provision of government services?		* What effect would this policy have on improving value for money in the provision of government services?

			** it should promote re-use and hence reduce sunk costs, as well as interop costs.

	* Would this policy support innovation, competition and choice in delivery of government services?		* Would this policy support innovation, competition and choice in delivery of government services?

			** It should, if bodies such as ours with an empirical worldview of standards can be chosen

	* In what way do software copyright licences and standards patent licences interact to support or prevent interoperability?		* In what way do software copyright licences and standards patent licences interact to support or prevent interoperability?

			** They often prevent interoperability, particularly when sprung on standards after they are in wide use.

	* How could adopting (Fair) Reasonable and Non Discriminatory ((F)RAND) standards deliver a level playing field for open source and proprietary software solution providers?		* How could adopting (Fair) Reasonable and Non Discriminatory ((F)RAND) standards deliver a level playing field for open source and proprietary software solution providers?

			** Sanctioning companies that use patents to obstruct open standards, or to extract rent from them would be a way to ensure that this is not abused.

	* Does selecting open standards which are compatible with a free or open source software licence exclude certain suppliers or products?		* Does selecting open standards which are compatible with a free or open source software licence exclude certain suppliers or products?

			** it may exclude those designed to extract rents in future.

	* Does a promise of non-assertion of a patent when used in open source software alleviate concerns relating to patents and royalty charging?		* Does a promise of non-assertion of a patent when used in open source software alleviate concerns relating to patents and royalty charging?

			** Yes, but the difficulty comes when patents are asserted by those nto party to the standard initially (eg Trolls and Non-Practicing Entities)

	* Should a different rationale be applied when purchasing off-the-shelf software solutions than is applied when purchasing bespoke solutions?		* Should a different rationale be applied when purchasing off-the-shelf software solutions than is applied when purchasing bespoke solutions?

			** Being sure that you can get your data out fo the off-the-shelf software in a useful form is as important, as otherwise it may impose hidden bespoke costs later.

	* In terms of standards for software interoperability, data and document formats, is there a need for the Government to engage with or provide funding for specific committees/bodies?		* In terms of standards for software interoperability, data and document formats, is there a need for the Government to engage with or provide funding for specific committees/bodies?

			** Engaging with empirical standards bodies like Microformats is always welcome. Funding may be trickier as it can distory

	* Are there any are other policy options which would meet the described outcomes more effectively?		* Are there any are other policy options which would meet the described outcomes more effectively?

			** Not clear.

	[http://consultation.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/openstandards/chapter-2/ Mandating Open Standards]		[http://consultation.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/openstandards/chapter-2/ Mandating Open Standards]

Kevin Marks: Create page, add links and Questions UK Govt wants answers to

2012-04-25T00:26:16Z

Create page, add links and Questions UK Govt wants answers to

New page

The UK Government is [http://consultation.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/openstandards/introduction/ consulting] on Open Standards support, and asking for responses on various questions about how they could encourage Open Standards through government action. Here are the questions:

[http://consultation.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/openstandards/chapter-1/ Section 1: defining open standards]:

* How does this definition of open standard compare to your view of what makes a standard 'open'?

* What will the Government be inhibited from doing if this definition of open standards is adopted for software interoperability, data and document formats across central government?

* For businesses attempting to break into the government IT market, would this policy make things easier or more difficult – does it help to level the playing field?

* How would mandating open standards for use in government IT for software interoperability, data and document formats affect your organisation?

* What effect would this policy have on improving value for money in the provision of government services?

* Would this policy support innovation, competition and choice in delivery of government services?

* In what way do software copyright licences and standards patent licences interact to support or prevent interoperability?

* How could adopting (Fair) Reasonable and Non Discriminatory ((F)RAND) standards deliver a level playing field for open source and proprietary software solution providers?

* Does selecting open standards which are compatible with a free or open source software licence exclude certain suppliers or products?

* Does a promise of non-assertion of a patent when used in open source software alleviate concerns relating to patents and royalty charging?

* Should a different rationale be applied when purchasing off-the-shelf software solutions than is applied when purchasing bespoke solutions?

* In terms of standards for software interoperability, data and document formats, is there a need for the Government to engage with or provide funding for specific committees/bodies?

* Are there any are other policy options which would meet the described outcomes more effectively?

[http://consultation.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/openstandards/chapter-2/ Mandating Open Standards]

* What criteria should the Government consider when deciding whether it is appropriate to mandate particular standards?

* What effect would mandating particular open standards have on improving value for money in the provision of government services?

* Are there any legal or procurement barriers to mandating specific open standards in the UK Government's IT?

* Could mandation of competing open standards for the same function deliver interoperable software and information at reduced cost?

* Could mandation of open standards promote anti-competitive behaviour in public procurement?

* How would mandation of specific open standards for government IT software interoperability, data and document formats affect your organisation/business?

* How should the Government best deal with the issue of change relating to legacy systems or incompatible updates to existing open standards?

* What should trigger the review of an open standard that has already been mandated?

* How should the Government strike a balance between nurturing innovation and conforming to standards?

* How should the Government confirm that a solution claiming conformity to a standard is interoperable in practice?

* Are there any are other policy options which would meet the objective more effectively?

[http://consultation.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/openstandards/chapter-3/ International Alignment]

* Is the proposed UK policy compatible with European policies, directives and regulations (existing or planned) such as the European Interoperability Framework version 2.0 and the reform proposal for European Standardisation?

* Will the open standards policy be beneficial or detrimental for innovation and competition in the UK and Europe?

* Are there any are other policy options which would meet the objectives described in this consultation paper more effectively?

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:54, 26 April 2012
Line 3:		Line 3:
	[http://consultation.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/openstandards/chapter-1/ Section 1: defining open standards]:		[http://consultation.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/openstandards/chapter-1/ Section 1: defining open standards]:

			<div class="discussion">
	* How does this definition of open standard compare to your view of what makes a standard 'open'?		* How does this definition of open standard compare to your view of what makes a standard 'open'?

	** The Microformats definition of a standard (see [[process]]) is compatible with the UK Govt version. Specifically:		** The Microformats definition of a standard (see [[process]]) is compatible with the UK Govt version. Specifically:
	*** Microformats are collaborative and transparently maintained on this Wiki		*** Microformats are collaborative and transparently maintained on this Wiki
Line 13:		Line 13:

	* What will the Government be inhibited from doing if this definition of open standards is adopted for software interoperability, data and document formats across central government?		* What will the Government be inhibited from doing if this definition of open standards is adopted for software interoperability, data and document formats across central government?

	** Data formats operate on multiple levels. There is a distinction between underlying structural form (XML, JSON, SQL HTML etc) and the vocabulary in use that defines field names and validity. A well-defined structural form can accommodate variations in vocabulary between versions cleanly. Adopting standards with a tight binding between structure and vocabulary may constrain what is transferable.		** Data formats operate on multiple levels. There is a distinction between underlying structural form (XML, JSON, SQL HTML etc) and the vocabulary in use that defines field names and validity. A well-defined structural form can accommodate variations in vocabulary between versions cleanly. Adopting standards with a tight binding between structure and vocabulary may constrain what is transferable.

	* For businesses attempting to break into the government IT market, would this policy make things easier or more difficult – does it help to level the playing field?		* For businesses attempting to break into the government IT market, would this policy make things easier or more difficult – does it help to level the playing field?

	** It should definitely help level the playing field.		** It should definitely help level the playing field.

	* How would mandating open standards for use in government IT for software interoperability, data and document formats affect your organisation?		* How would mandating open standards for use in government IT for software interoperability, data and document formats affect your organisation?

	** Clearly it depends on the details of which standards and organisations are chosen. If we're a chosen standardisation organisation, it may lead to an influx of new editors and specifications, which is welcomed, but may add to contention here.		** Clearly it depends on the details of which standards and organisations are chosen. If we're a chosen standardisation organisation, it may lead to an influx of new editors and specifications, which is welcomed, but may add to contention here.

	* What effect would this policy have on improving value for money in the provision of government services?		* What effect would this policy have on improving value for money in the provision of government services?

	** it should promote re-use and hence reduce sunk costs, as well as interop costs.		** it should promote re-use and hence reduce sunk costs, as well as interop costs.

	* Would this policy support innovation, competition and choice in delivery of government services?		* Would this policy support innovation, competition and choice in delivery of government services?

	** It should, if bodies such as ours with an empirical worldview of standards can be chosen		** It should, if bodies such as ours with an empirical worldview of standards can be chosen

	* In what way do software copyright licences and standards patent licences interact to support or prevent interoperability?		* In what way do software copyright licences and standards patent licences interact to support or prevent interoperability?

	** They often prevent interoperability, particularly when sprung on standards after they are in wide use.		** They often prevent interoperability, particularly when sprung on standards after they are in wide use.

	* How could adopting (Fair) Reasonable and Non Discriminatory ((F)RAND) standards deliver a level playing field for open source and proprietary software solution providers?		* How could adopting (Fair) Reasonable and Non Discriminatory ((F)RAND) standards deliver a level playing field for open source and proprietary software solution providers?

	** Sanctioning companies that use patents to obstruct open standards, or to extract rent from them would be a way to ensure that this is not abused.		** Sanctioning companies that use patents to obstruct open standards, or to extract rent from them would be a way to ensure that this is not abused.

	* Does selecting open standards which are compatible with a free or open source software licence exclude certain suppliers or products?		* Does selecting open standards which are compatible with a free or open source software licence exclude certain suppliers or products?

	** it may exclude those designed to extract rents in future.		** it may exclude those designed to extract rents in future.

	* Does a promise of non-assertion of a patent when used in open source software alleviate concerns relating to patents and royalty charging?		* Does a promise of non-assertion of a patent when used in open source software alleviate concerns relating to patents and royalty charging?

	** Yes, but the difficulty comes when patents are asserted by those nto party to the standard initially (eg Trolls and Non-Practicing Entities)		** Yes, but the difficulty comes when patents are asserted by those nto party to the standard initially (eg Trolls and Non-Practicing Entities)

	* Should a different rationale be applied when purchasing off-the-shelf software solutions than is applied when purchasing bespoke solutions?		* Should a different rationale be applied when purchasing off-the-shelf software solutions than is applied when purchasing bespoke solutions?

	** Being sure that you can get your data out fo the off-the-shelf software in a useful form is as important, as otherwise it may impose hidden bespoke costs later.		** Being sure that you can get your data out fo the off-the-shelf software in a useful form is as important, as otherwise it may impose hidden bespoke costs later.

	* In terms of standards for software interoperability, data and document formats, is there a need for the Government to engage with or provide funding for specific committees/bodies?		* In terms of standards for software interoperability, data and document formats, is there a need for the Government to engage with or provide funding for specific committees/bodies?

	** Engaging with empirical standards bodies like Microformats is always welcome. Funding may be trickier as it can distory		** Engaging with empirical standards bodies like Microformats is always welcome. Funding may be trickier as it can distory

	* Are there any are other policy options which would meet the described outcomes more effectively?		* Are there any are other policy options which would meet the described outcomes more effectively?

	** Not clear.		** Not clear.
			</div>
	[http://consultation.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/openstandards/chapter-2/ Mandating Open Standards]		[http://consultation.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/openstandards/chapter-2/ Mandating Open Standards]