Redirijo este correo conteniendo la nota de prensa sobre la adopcion del documento OpenDocument OASIS por la union europea y los retos que tendremos en el futuro inmediato.
Gary Edwards es el lider del estandar en OASIS y ha sacado esta nota para toda la comunidad de OpenOffice.org OpenDocument es el formato de OpenOffice.org para la version 2.x -- Alexandro Colorado Co-Leader of OpenOffice.org Spanish http://es.openoffice.org/ On Saturday, April 29^th , 2005, the OASIS membership voted to ratify the OpenDocument v.1 XML File Format specification as an OASIS Open Standard. There were no negative votes or negative comments cast (a single no vote would have defeated the measure). The OpenDocument ballot also recorded one of the highest affirmative efforts on record, only slightly exceeded by the October 2004 ratio ratifying the OASIS UBL (Universal Business Language) proposal. Clearly it's time to move our attention towards the marketing and promotion of OpenDocument as a universal XML file format for cross platform productivity environments. OASIS administration has notified the OpenDocument TC that there will be some promotion of the event. They do plan on a press release featuring comments from corporate members who have submitted formal statements validating the successful implementation of OpenDocument. Novell, IBM, Sun, and Stellent have submitted validations, which were, by the way, needed before OpenDocument could be put up for ratification vote. I have no idea how OASIS is going to handle mention of the open source communities OpenOffice.org and KOffice in their promotional release. Since we lack corporate membership status, OASIS did notify us that our statements of validation could not be used. Oh well. The completion of ratification brings us to consideration of some important issues which perhaps could be seen to fall under the broad umbrella of "marketing". These include best practices for logo design and reuse, compliance guidelines, and conformance testing. There is increasingly clear consensus among OpenDocument TC (technical committee) members that the TC should continue to focus on the technical aspects of the specification, and seek other means of coordinating OpenDocument marketing needs. Being both an open forum, and at the heart of the OpenDocument universe, it would seem that the OOo Marketing Group would be the perfect mechanism for coordinating efforts that would involve many corporate partners and organizations certain to benefit by increased market awareness of just how damn incredible OpenDocument really is. Are you guys up for this? There is quite a bit of history here. In October of 2004 Sam Hiser submitted a request to the OpenDocument TC for advice on OASIS logo creation and reuse. We in turn sought advice from OASIS administration. Surprisingly, they like their logo just the way it is, and do allow reuse as long as the logo isn't changed. LA Laker yellow gold and squeamish purple is here to stay. Since that time, the TC has met on a number of occasions with OASIS Administration to discuss the issues of logo use, conformance testing, and compliance guidelines. OASIS does have a marketing and conformance effort underway, but since the plan is geared towards revenue generation, this option was found by the OpenDocument TC to be unsuitable. Such a plan would seriously limit or even preclude the participation of open source communities. Nyet. The issue remains though. And if we don't do something about compliance, there's a chance that someone else will see an opportunity and take the initiative. So while the OpenDocument TC lacks enforcement authority, we do feel the need to take the initiative regarding marketing and compliance. A number of alternative proposals have been discussed, but as i said earlier, there is growing consensus around those ideas that engage and rely on the OOo Marketing group. Keep in mind that none of what follows is carved in stone. Just some thoughts for discussion. Logo & Marketing: I guess the first marketing issue is that of a logo. My understanding is that if "OASIS" is used with "OpenDocument", as in "OASIS OpenDocument", then you have to comply with the OASIS look and feel restrictions. That said, there are reasons to focus marketing efforts on "OpenDocument" without the OASIS label. Immediately following the OASIS ratification, the OpenDocument TC undertook the task of submitting the specification to ISO, as the EU asked us to do last September. Interestingly, ISO does not allow labeling for marketing purposes. So maybe it makes sense to just market "OpenDocument" as an Open Standard instead of an OASIS -- ISO standard? Let me also mention as an aside that in the past few months i have personally been engaged in a number of discussions with some prominent OpenDocument partners and other OASIS delegates regarding the issue of submitting OpenDocument to the W3C as a possible successor to HTML -- XHTML. One delegate has even offered to arrange the presentation to Sir Tim, so it don't think the idea is as far fetched as it might at first seem. Perhaps once there is a browser plug-in available, this suggestion might make more sense though. I'm hoping that the OOo Marketing Group will take the lead regarding the logo effort, and reach out to the marketers at Novell, IBM Workplace, Sun StarOffice, Stellent, and the KOffice community to come up with a consensus as to how best move forward with a standardized OpenDocument marketing logo. One of the things the TC has discussed is the need for a highly recognizable logo that all vendors and service providers could use that would provide the marketplace with instant recognition of OpenDocument capabilities. Kind of like when you purchase a DVD player from Best Buy, there is a string of easy to recognize logos on the front of every item proclaiming which file formats the device supports. One of the marketing problems that must be contended with is that, outside of the few who have stepped forward and made a public declaration, it gets murky as to does and who doesn't use OpenDocument. The truth is that OpenDocument is being used by enterprises, systems vendors, publication and content management providers of all sorts. It's useful wherever the power of XML transformation is needed. For instance, Oracle's Collaboration Suite is in compliance with OpenDocument, but they declined for the moment to get involved with a validation statement that might be used in OASIS marketing. And that's after i personally pleaded with Su Lim (Oracle Marketing) and Jeremy Chone (Oracle Open Source) to consider making a statement in support of OpenDocument. Su was very much in favor of jumping in. Jeremy chooses to play it safe. The long dark shadow of Redmond and all that. I don't know where Red Hat, Linspire, Mandrake, Zope, Adobe, or SeeBeyond (just to name a few) sit on this issue. Adobe has announced that they will be working with IBM's Workplace, and we have been soliciting their participation on the OpenDocument TC regarding enhancement of the metadata component. With lots of response and little action. There's lots of reason to remain hopeful though. Compliance & Conformance: This is a very complicated issue. A Pandora's box for sure. As you might know, there are many vendors and service providers repackaging OOo components for resale and distribution. For the most part, they are perhaps all in "compliance". The list of service providers and vendors pledged to build on IBM's Workplace is stunning. They would be in compliance. And with the next version of KOffice set to go native with OpenDocument, OpenDocument happy components might pop up anywhere there is a QUtopia environment. One suggestion that has come up is that OOo Marketing forms an open market watch group that checks for logo implementation and compliance with the specification. The market group would identify implementations, and contact the owners for basic compliance information. The OASIS OpenDocument TC would provide the market watch group with simplified testing criteria designed to throw red flags based on general concerns. Probably a simple import ~ export routine. In the event of a red flag, the market watch group would forward the issue to the OpenDocument TC for further study. If needed, the TC would notify owners that a study is under way and that there might be some concerns with compliance. Lacking any kind of enforcement authority, a TC initiated finding of "non compliance" would at best only trigger an explanation and request that the vendor/owner consider suggestions as to how best remedy any discrepancies, based on TC and OSS community comments. We might request vendor marketing materials state something on the order of "OpenDocument compliance certification pending". Once compliance is affirmed, one would hope that vendors and service providers might come to value the label "certified OpenDocument". We have already seen the compliance issue raised in the EU. As early as November of 2004, claims and accusations were being tossed about with wild abandon. The fact that the OASIS OpenDocument standard has made it's way into EU purchase cycle requirements is significant, but this is just the beginning. Compliance is no longer an idle issue, and we need to come up with an approach that works for OASIS and, the many future users of the OpenDocument file format specification. Maybe the EU TAC/IDA task force has a methodology in place for compliance testing? That would make for an interesting place to start tackling this issue. So in summary, post ratification of OpenDocument as an OASIS Open Standard, there are three marketing issues that need attention. They are best practices for logo use, conformance testing, and, compliance guidelines. Your thoughts and suggestions are most appreciated. I will be monitoring the gmane OOo marketing news list for comments. ~ge~ Gary Edwards OpenStack Business Systems [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (650) 365-0899 (650) 888-2268 c. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
