1 / 10

Issue Analysis: Open Standards – ODF implementation

Issue Analysis: Open Standards – ODF implementation. Gaurab Misra MIS Practicum. Open Standards. The Relative Ease of integration of different communication platforms into other systems’ operations

astra
Download Presentation

Issue Analysis: Open Standards – ODF implementation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Issue Analysis: Open Standards – ODF implementation GaurabMisra MIS Practicum

  2. Open Standards • The Relative Ease of integration of different communication platforms into other systems’ operations • A set of consistent guidelines for diverse systems operating together, multiple systems able to use information exchanged between them

  3. Benefits/Disadvantages • Benefits • Available to everyone for examination/application • Creation of fair and competitive environment for all to apply • No vendor can lock in a specific user/group • Disadvantages • Enforceability of true “open” standard • Technical “hooks” built in to open-source software, enabling co’s developing software to establish or claim licensing and dist. Rights • Enforced compatibility with mitigating systems can cause vulnerability to security breach • Technical limitations/compatibility with existing proprietary standards currently dominating market

  4. Who Determines an Open standard? • International Organization for Standardization-ISO • Composed of members of other countries’ standardization boards • ISO/IEC Joint Committee 1 – formed to facilitate IT standards to meet business and user requirements • Ecma (fmrly European Computer Manufacturer’s Assoc) • Composed of membership made up of co’s producing systems in Europe

  5. Specific Areas • Open Document Format (ODF) • Open source standard file format for electronic documents i.e. Spreadsheet, word processing, charts, graphs, slide presentations • Supported by myriad open-source software • Web-based Office Suite • Content Management Systems • Knowledge Management Solutions

  6. Currently not supported by…… • MICROSOFT! • Not supported until year 2007, baby steps being taken • File converter plugins being developed by third parties • Microsoft creating own platform: OOXML integrated into Office 2007

  7. Issues • ODF created and developed to enable interoperability and document sharing accessibility • XML-based • Alternative to proprietary systems • Created to offset effects of proprietary systems which are legacy or headed to obsolescence, becoming expensive or impossible to access • No royalties or licensing legalities • Save businesses and consumers money

  8. Factors preventing acceptance • Lack of knowledge among governments, policymakers and organizations about the format • Resistance from proprietary software producers • MS Powerful Lobbyists • Commonwealth of MA – reversed 2005 stance on initiative to switch to open standard applications and approved MS’ OOXML as open standard

  9. Difficulties of implementation • Proprietary software co’s lock on majority of organizations + enterprises • In gov’ts and large bureaucracies there may not be high level of redundancy between subdivisions and bus. Processes – difficult to standardize • Support: • Fewer drivers for tech support until Open-source was adopted for development by larger co’s like Sun and Novell • Blueprint and tech specs have a maturity curve, standardization more difficult, developers going on divergent paths

  10. Who should be concerned? • Governments • Proprietary Software Producers • Technology developers • Lobbyists • Members of Boards of Standards

More Related