
Open Source and Open Standards under Threat in Europe - dreemteem
http://www.computerworlduk.com/community/blogs/index.cfm?entryid=2878
======
gizmo
I can't make heads nor tails from this rant. It reads as if the author is very
upset about something, but he never quite explains what it is that's so
upsetting to him. The arguments he does make are nonsensical (such as the rant
about openness being a continuum according to MS.)

Low quality, low content, if you ask me.

~~~
ZeroGravitas
Did you read the second and third pages? It's not obvious that it continues,
and most of the explanation is there.

Basically, the EU was going to say that open standards and open source were
good things that should be promoted for the benefit of the citizens and
businesses of the EU.

Not a particularly controversial position as various US governmental
organisations such as the Department of Defence, and various other national
bodies like China have said similar things.

This has, naturally, been lobbied against by Microsoft. Privately of course,
because it, at the very least, appears shady to be arguing against open
standards and free competition. And it seems they may be on the verge of
getting what they want, which would be a bad thing for almost everyone but
them.

Regarding the openness continuum, do you really want a government document on
interoperability to say that one way to achieve "openess" is for everyone to
use the same proprietary product?

" _While there is a correlation between openness and interoperability, it is
also true that interoperability can be obtained without openness, for example
via homogeneity of the ICT systems, which implies that all partners use, or
agree to use, the same solution to implement a European Public Service._ "

Note this seems to contradict common sense as well as many of these
definitions which indicate you need at least two systems to "interoperate":

<http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=define:interoperability>

