Hi Jan: On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 02:35:41AM +0100, Jan Claeys wrote: > Op woensdag 23-12-2009 om 14:34 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Y P: > > IMHO it's an easy way politics does like to repush the responsibility > > of those faults to another, here in this case they doesn't choosed the > > software offered, but they does accept to contribute in it! so this is > > a support of those non-free solutions, wheneven they do write you that > > it's the responsibility of the firms that were proposing the > > solutions. > > Actually, as Mila Druwe says, the government is not allowed to > push/force a particular proposal (that would be against fair > compatition).
I've no asked to push one or another proposition, I just said it is not done that they push ONE and ONLY, implicitely, by ignoring alternate offers based on Mac or Linux: if they are not the reseller themselve, they can (will) as gov inform the citizens about available alternatives. > They can set some objective criteria though. > > E.g. once the government finally moves over to ODF as the only real open > document format (as there exist no implementations of OOXML, and > probably never will), then the government can require compatibility with > ODF (so that people can communicate with the government efficiently). Mmm, sorry, IMHO this is another issue: for now the most important thing is "informing": - we do need to inform the minister's department (fedict) about those wrong choices - ask for implementing thos task by providing information on all the concerned sites, because there are Mac and Linux solutions near Windows. Mery Xmas Jan. Y)ellow P)enguin -- ubuntu-be mailing list / mailto:[email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-be
