more on open std definition -- Re: Group Note FPWD is done

> ...
> 3) In http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/Group/docs/note#interop
> ...
> d. About Open Standards, you say "It is of paramount importance to  
> use open standards where available – for instance, use the X.509  
> technology stack when digital certificates are required.". I would  
> suggest to refer to something more generic than a standard few  
> government officials might have heard of. A good summary of the  
> characteristics of open standards was given by
> The Berkman Center for Internet and Society at the Harvard Law  
> School's Roadmap for Open Ecosystems, which included government  
> experts, came up with the following1:
> “This ROADMAP considers a standard to be open when it complies with  
> all these elements:
>
> · Cannot be controlled by any single person or entity with any  
> vested interests;
>
> · Evolution and management in a transparent process open to all  
> interested parties;
>
> · Platform independent, vendor neutral and usable for multiple  
> implementations;
>
> · Openly published (including availability of specifications and  
> supporting material);
>
> · Available royalty free or at minimal cost, with other restrictions  
> (such as field of use and defensive suspension) offered on  
> reasonable and non-discriminatory terms; and
>
> · Approved through due process by rough consensus among participants.”
>
> 1Roadmap for Open Ecosystems, see: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/epolicy/
>
> In addition, it is essential that open standards be compatible with  
> a variety of licensing and development models, including open source.
> I also attach the two recent policy briefs from the Openforum Europe  
> Standards Special Interest Group (they can also be found on the web  
> at http://www.openforumeurope.org/initiatives/sigs-1/standards-sig/).


I don't think this part needs a new ISSUE, but it's related to ISSUE-2  
and ISSUE-7.

-- Jose