A significant move in the right direction
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tracyanne May 09, 2012 10:00 PM EDT |
I think |
| Fettoosh May 09, 2012 10:19 PM EDT |
Quoting:(d) Avoid the acquisition of products that do not comply with open standards for interoperability or data storage; and I wonder who those two items apply to? :-) |
| caitlyn May 09, 2012 11:17 PM EDT |
Yes, this is a good thing. Now we need other states to follow and do the same. |
| jhansonxi May 10, 2012 1:13 AM EDT |
This is what happens when a company doesn't keep up with political gratuities. The politicians start making uninformed decisions. :D |
| caitlyn May 10, 2012 1:54 AM EDT |
I take it the "uninformed" part was sarcasm :) |
| skelband May 10, 2012 2:42 AM EDT |
Let us hope that this isn't a stunt to get Microsoft to the bargaining table. It's happened before on numerous occasions. |
| gus3 May 10, 2012 6:50 AM EDT |
New Hampshire's state motto: "Live Free or Die." (as in speech, or beer?) |
| Bob_Robertson May 10, 2012 10:00 AM EDT |
Oklahoma is in the process of considering such as law as well, if I get a lead on it I'll post it. Skelband, Seth Cohn, who sponsored the bill, is a friend of mine. I'll let him know how warm was the reception his work received here. And knowing him it had nothing what so ever to do with a shell-game to entice Microsoft. Gus, While complacency has changed the working motto to be more like, "Life Free or Be Mildly Inconvenienced", the general attitude of reliance on one's own resources helps immensely. |
| skelband May 10, 2012 10:28 AM EDT |
Sounds like a good step in the right direction. Well done that man. |
| lxerguest May 10, 2012 12:11 PM EDT |
Just to require that open source software be favorably considered is a different approach than Massachusetts mandating the OpenDoc standard across the board,which opened the door to objections on the basis of legacy Office applications needing to be rewritten,and unreadiness in certain situations like features for disabled. |
| djohnston May 10, 2012 4:26 PM EDT |
Quoting:Just to require that open source software be favorably considered is a different approach than Massachusetts mandating the OpenDoc standard across the board,which opened the door to objections on the basis of legacy Office applications needing to be rewritten,and unreadiness in certain situations like features for disabled. Agreed. Although New Hampshire's bill is a step in the right direction, it doesn't really mandate open file formats, like the Massachusetts bill would have. The AMENDED ANALYSIS section states: Quoting:This bill requires state agencies to consider open source software when acquiring software and promotes the use of open data formats by state agencies. This bill also directs the commissioner of information technology to develop a statewide information policy based on principles of open government data. (emphasis added) |
| tracyanne May 10, 2012 5:55 PM EDT |
How strongly they "consider" and "promote" depends on the commissioner of information technology, if that person really understands the issues I'm quite sure consider will be prefer, and promote will be promote strongly (by making it less easy to do it any other way) |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!