Yesterday, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts released the final version of its Enterprise Technical Reference Model (ETRM) and it <gasp> included a thumbs up for the Microsoft/Apple/British Library-sponsored Ecma-376 Office Open XML standard.
Don’t worry PJ, Bob, et al. It’s not a sign of the apocalypse, the Rapture, or the Quickening. Please act accordingly. It’s just a sign that Massachusetts is realizing that the technology mandates you were proposing are simply a dumb idea. ODF is a decent technology, but it ISN’T one-size fits all solution to all the Commonwealth’s problems.
Yet, we at ACT agree at least partially with the ODF jihadists…this policy still isn’t great. At its core, the policy is still based on a government technology mandate. As we said in our press release:
The Massachusetts open format policy has evolved into a much more effective solution to the challenges of interoperability, competition, and long-term document access, but it can still be improved. The one real limitation to the policy is the rigid definition of ‘open standard’ used in the ETRM. The policy limits the Commonwealth’s choices to ’open standards,’ when the goals could be achieved with merely ‘open formats.’ While small firms are often willing to open up their formats and technologies, they often do not have the political clout to move their formats through an open standards body the way IBM, Sun, and Microsoft have done. In fact, even open source formats like Ogg Vorbis would be locked out. Yet, these small firm technologies may better meet the needs of the Commonwealth and individual agencies.
I feel like this point is almost always lost in the debate. The vast majority of the push for ODF is simply anti-Microsoft, not a real effort at trying to help governments deal with the challenges of long-term document access, interoperability, and competition. If it was, then the policy would be focused on these goals and not trampling on technologies that could help governments better reach them.