Hi there, On Monday 31 October 2011 10:45:04 Otto Kekäläinen wrote: > Hello, > > 2011/10/26 Marcos Marado <[email protected]>: > > In Portugal, after having a law that forces the Government to use Open > > Standards, there's now this division defining how and which open > > standards to support... The consultation about it ends at the 30th, and > > we're still in the middle of the work for it. Several questions already > > rose, tho... And I'm > > > hoping someone can help us answering them in this last few days: > Sorry I missed the deadline.
No problem, this is just one of the steps for this process, and your feedback is very appreciated... > > * TLS 1.1 or 1.2 (since the biggest F.S. browsers don't support it) > > * is it true that konqueror supports them? > > * is it true that midori supports them? > > * is there any (free software) mail client that supports SMTPS, POP3S > > and IMAP3S using TLS 1.1 or 1.2 (which one?) > > I think neither Firefox nor Thuderbird support TLS 1.1 or TLS 1.2, > even though it has been underway for a few years now (both use NSS). I > don't think we should advocate old standards just because some FOSS > does not support it, rather do it the other way, use the standard > requirement as an argument to get funding from the public sector to > implement support in FOSS (although I'm sure it's not easy). Yeah, that was/is our general position, even if it's not that easy to do recomendations in that state, without giving implementation examples... And while I would love to see the funding from the public sector to implement support in FOSS, I surely won't hold my breath. > > * is there any free software at all supporting (even if only partially) > > the XBRL standard? > > Never heard. Not only it seems this is silently starting to be mandatory in an hell lot of countries (which caught me by surprise, I only noticed it to search for this matter...), it is encumbered with patents, so not considered by us as an open standard. > I think open standards is the way to go. Governments should enforce > them by requiring support with clausules like "X standard version x.x > or newer" where the x.x should be the version of the standard that was > released at least three years ago. In some software, free or not, > cannot keep up with the standard in three years, we should put effort > in software development rather than lobbying for stagnation in > standards requirements.. sometimes this can be though, dough. Agreed. It actually caught my attention that the work we're doing in Portugal for this, and some other countries do/did for the same purpose would give us quite good material for a list of "things needed", both regarding open standards and free software supporting them... Best regards, and thanks for your reply, -- Marcos Marado ANSOL -- http://ansol.org _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
