[Ecommerce] ODF: Feb 16 Mark your calendar (and story on Open Document Format in Financial Times)

[Manon Ress]

Mark your calendar (and read Open Document Format story in Financial
Times)

Public Brown Bag Lunch: "ODF, What's in it for Consumers?"

Thursday February 16, 2006 12:30-2:30
1621 Connecticut Ave, NW
Washington DC 20009
+202 332 2679
contact: manon.ress@cptech.org

Invited include:  Ed Mierzinski (USPIRG), Jeanine Kenney, (Consumers
Union), Paul Hyland (CPSR), Jeff Kaplan (Open ePolicy Group,
Berkman), Will Rodger (CCIA) and Sam Hiser (Principal, Hiser +
Adelstein).

Feel free to circulate.

More later.

Manon

FT story below
************************************************************************
***************************************************
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/02cd6280-8ce9-11da-9daf-0000779e2340.html

Progress towards openness is being watched carefully
By Sam Hiser
Published: January 24 2006 17:01 | Last updated: January 24 2006 17:01

Many in the software industry are watching progress made in
Massachusetts by the US state=E2=80=99s government in its aim to establish
an open document file format across its executive branch.

The policy was finalised in the autumn and has survived political
siege, loss of key personnel, Microsoft=E2=80=99s negative public relations
and opposition from people with disabilities.

The move provides an opportunity to bring data-sovereignty and long-
term data access, as well as bring back competition and innovation to
application software markets. Even in these early days, the
OpenDocument format has been embraced by such demanding organisations
as the city of Munich, the British Library and the US Library of
Congress. This should be no surprise because government organisations
with their cavernous archives are among the most data- and document-
sensitive customers.

Early versions of OpenDocument have been around since 2001 as the
defaults in OpenOffice and StarOffice (which have tens of millions of
users worldwide); the final OpenDocument 1.0 specification was
ratified by its steward group in May 2005.

Against OpenDocument, the format proposed by Microsoft lacks
openness. Microsoft=E2=80=99s approach is to dress its Windows Vista-tied
file formats from the upcoming Office 12 in approvals by the
standards bodies, ECMA International and the International
Organization for Standardization. But this may not gain acceptance in
an industry more conscious of the benefits of open software standards
and open, shared document formats than five years ago, the last time
Microsoft launched an important advance.

The Microsoft file format, called Office Open XML, is not so open, in
fact. Microsoft=E2=80=99s Alan Yates called the format specification sent i=
n
December to ECMA =E2=80=9C.=E2=80=89.=E2=80=89.=E2=80=89utterly, completely=
, perpetually
open=E2=80=89.=E2=80=89.=E2=80=89.=E2=80=9D yet the 2,000-page specificatio=
n reveals
proprietary application and system calls to Office and Windows that
are unacceptable for a format called =E2=80=9Copen=E2=80=9D. And it has sec=
urity
vulnerabilities that would never have been included in an openly-
developed collaborative specification. These problems add complexity,
obstruct functionality or endanger users if the format is to operate
with non-Microsoft applications or other operating systems platforms.

This appears to be simply another oversight in a rushed submission.
Some observers of software standards have expressed concern for ECMA
and ISO because their reputations may suffer after an ignominious
rubber stamping of Microsoft=E2=80=99s proprietary and insecure format.

Chief information officers in many countries are watching carefully
the progress made this year by Massachusetts OpenDocument policy and
software deployment. The policy=E2=80=99s go-live date of January 1 2007,
may have to move if OpenDocument-enabled software applications
(OpenOffice, StarOffice, IBM=E2=80=99s Lotus Workplace, KOffice, to name th=
e
leading contenders) do not match the accessibility integration
Microsoft=E2=80=99s Office and Windows flagships enjoy with the leading
third-party Assistive Technology products.

These include expensive screen readers, magnifiers, keyboard and
mouse controls and text-to-speech converters.

With such outstanding questions, few US state chief information
officers can be blamed for standing on the sidelines.

Anyone who has imagined typing a memo on a PC with the monitor turned
off and expect the formatting to be correct would understand the
reaction against ETRM 3.5 and OpenDocument from representatives of
people with disabilities. Given the disruptive changes around XML-
based file formats, there will be an increase in the rate of
innovation and competition for Assistive Technologies that integrate
with a PC. There is already a growing number of general OpenDocument-
ready office suite applications lining up in Wikipedia.

Disabled people understand that working with a format such as
OpenDocument introduces benefits witnessed before only with the TCP/
IP standard and the birth of the internet. OpenDocument offers a
chance for universal documents to work with software programming
interfaces that are, for once, visible. Anyone can see the benefit of
that.


Sam Hiser is a systems consultant and O=E2=80=99Reilly author based in New
York


************************************************
Manon Anne Ress
manon.ress@cptech.org,
www.cptech.org

Consumer Project on Technology
1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20009 USA
Tel.:  +1.202.332.2670, Ext 16 Fax: +1.202.332.2673

Consumer Project on Technology
1 Route des  Morillons, CP 2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland
Tel: +41 22 791 6727

Consumer Project on Technology
24 Highbury Crescent, London, N5 1RX, UK
Tel: +44(0)207 226 6663 ex 252 Fax: +44(0)207 354 0607