The Joe Report

O mais excitante de acompanhar essas disputas (como a mostrada no post anterior) é sentir que seu “time” está ganhando ;D. No livro de visitas da ODF Alliance Brasil surgiu uma dúvida sobre essa matéria intitulada “Game over for OpenDocument?” onde Bethann Pepoli, CIO do Massachusetts ITD opta pelo formato OOXML definindo-o como um formato livre utilizando-se de uma lista extremamente vaga de requisitos para a escolha.

O importante é que mesmo Bethann Pepoli confessou que a decisão não era final e ainda estava sujeita a alterações, inclusive a retirada total do OOXML dos projetos do ITD. Abaixo um pequena citação da nota:

The only surprise is that it took new ITD CIO Bethann Pepoli so long to make the announcement that OOXML would be officially recognized as an “open” XML file format going forward. How she determined OOXML is open when the Microsoft Open Specification Promise allows no other developer to implement it is a mystery, but it seems a safe bet that the decision was based on political and practical considerations rather than sound legal advice about OOXML’s qualification as an open standard. See definitions ostensibly used by Massachusetts ITD to define openness in its ETRM:

But Pepoli said adoption of Open XML is not a done deal.”Someone could submit a comment and we could make a review of ETRM and make changes,” she said. Those changes could include eliminating Open XML from ETRM in the final draft.

O que aconteceu em seguida foi que o ODFA (OpenDocument Format Alliance) soltou uma nota comentando de forma brilhantíssima a nota anterior de Bethann Pepoli. Segue fragmento:

Dear Ms. Pepoli,
On behalf of the OpenDocument Format Alliancei (ODFA), I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Enterprise Technical Reference Model (ETRM) v4.0 – Public Review Draft.
The Alliance includes more than 400 member organizations in 52 countries dedicated to educating policy makers, IT administrators and the public on the benefits and opportunities of the OpenDocument Format (ODF). ODF helps ensure that government information, records and documents are accessible across platforms and applications, even as technologies change.

The Commonwealth’s open standards policy requires open standards to allow multiple vendors to compete directly based on the features and performance of their products, and to provide for an existing technology solution that is portable and that can be removed and replaced with that of another vendor with minimal effort and without major interruption.

OOXML is in direct contradiction with these laudable objectives, and public access to vital records and information would be seriously compromised by the inclusion of OOXML under the ETRM. Until such time as OOXML has full, demonstrable multi-vendor support across multiple platforms, the Commonwealth should refrain from recommending its use by executive agencies. Following are the critical factors that currently prevent OOXML from being considered an “open standard.”

Mais capítulos dessa novela serão postados aqui, um agradecimento especial a Avi Alkalay, um dos principais gurus desse projeto no Brasil, que passou o link da nota.

Padrões arte, dica, linux, scripts, windows