co-board November 2007

co-board@lists.fsfe.org

6 participants
32 discussions

Certifiedopen.com email addresses
by Shane Martin Coughlan 03 Dec '07

03 Dec '07

Dear board We need to prepare certifiedopen.com email addresses ASAP for at least Rod and myself to ensure that communication with CO test applications looks professional. Who is in charge of this aspect of our infrastructure? I suggest shane(a)certifiedopen.com and rod(a)certifiedopen.com as the two addresses. Shane -- Shane Coughlan FTF Coordinator Free Software Foundation Europe Office: +41435000366 ext 408 / Mobile: +41792633406 coughlan(a)fsfeurope.org Support Free Software > http://fsfe.org

2 3

Conf Call
by Graham Taylor 30 Nov '07

30 Nov '07

When can we next have a call to get a general status update on all areas? I'm in Brussels today /tomorrow so will be difficult. How about Monday afternoon? Rgds G

3 6

Re: Fw: Procedures
by Graham Taylor 23 Nov '07

23 Nov '07

Most peculiar, I never received it. Have checked back. I suggest perhaps we have another of our quick calls to discuss both this and the Gov Council - Monday? we are both together for the OFe Ops meeting anyhow - 1430 CET, 1330 UK?? How about Georg and Shane - does this suit? Rgds G ----- Original Message ----- From: "bob blatchford" <bob(a)openforumeurope.org> To: "Graham Taylor" <graham(a)openforumeurope.org> Sent: Friday, November 23, 2007 9:13 AM Subject: Re: Fw: Procedures > Graham > > I sent it to CO Board email list, so you should have received it. > > Bob > > On Fri, 2007-11-23 at 10:10 +0000, Graham Taylor wrote: >> Did you send this to me - I never received it? >> g >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Shane Martin Coughlan" <coughlan(a)fsfeurope.org> >> To: <board(a)certifiedopen.com> >> Cc: <rod.norman(a)openforumeurope.org> >> Sent: Friday, November 23, 2007 9:39 AM >> Subject: Re: Procedures >> >> >> > Hi Bob >> > >> > Bob wrote: >> >> So I propose we quickly put together an internal document outlining >> >> all >> >> processes and procedures for the operation of the Certified Open web >> >> site and the Certification process. >> >> I have this morning produced an outline draft of this document (see >> >> attached) comments, contributions and ideas for new sections welcome. >> > >> > I think this document is useful. I also agree with Georg that it would >> > be useful to send this document to the governance council for this >> > input. >> > >> > Shane >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Shane Coughlan >> > FTF Coordinator >> > Free Software Foundation Europe >> > Office: +41435000366 ext 408 / Mobile: +41792633406 >> > coughlan(a)fsfeurope.org >> > Support Free Software > http://fsfe.org >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Certified Open Board mailing list >> > board(a)certifiedopen.com >> > https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/co-board >> > >> > >> > -- >> > No virus found in this incoming message. >> > Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> > Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.4/1146 - Release Date: >> > 22/11/2007 18:55 >> > >> > >> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.4/1146 - Release Date: 22/11/2007 18:55

2 1

Procedures
by Bob 23 Nov '07

23 Nov '07

All The recent events experienced with the first CO certification application have demonstrated some issues with our procedures, also with Rod going to Australia for a month it is important that others can carry out any necessary administration procedures. So I propose we quickly put together an internal document outlining all processes and procedures for the operation of the Certified Open web site and the Certification process. I have this morning produced an outline draft of this document (see attached) comments, contributions and ideas for new sections welcome. Regards Bob

5 6

Re: Co process
by Shane Martin Coughlan 22 Nov '07

22 Nov '07

bob blatchford wrote: > OFE/FSFE review status daily - > > CO Application arrives > OFE/Rod reviews for completeness > If errors found > email sent to applicant > email sent to FSFE/Shane > If OK email sent to FSFE/Shane > > FSFE/Shane reviews content > If errors > email sent to applicant > If OK > Formally certify product > email sent to applicant > email sent to OFE/Rod to kick off accounting > > We will need to ensure these emails come from a CO email address. > We are putting together some standard email text. I believe this process should work. Sounds good. Shane -- Shane Coughlan FTF Coordinator Free Software Foundation Europe Office: +41435000366 ext 408 / Mobile: +41792633406 coughlan(a)fsfeurope.org Support Free Software > http://fsfe.org

2 2

Journalist wants to talk about Certified Open
by Shane Martin Coughlan 22 Nov '07

22 Nov '07

Hi Graham, This one is for you I suspect. Gijs Hillenius - a friendly Dutch journalist - is considering doing a story on Certified Open. He'd like to talk about any interaction the programme has with Danish and UK public administration and about OFE's research that indicates that up to 90% of bodies are affected by lock in. gijs(a)hillenius.net is his contact address. Regards Shane -- Shane Coughlan FTF Coordinator Free Software Foundation Europe Office: +41435000366 ext 408 / Mobile: +41792633406 coughlan(a)fsfeurope.org Support Free Software > http://fsfe.org

1 0

Re: CO ADMIN ACCESS - urgent
by Shane Martin Coughlan 21 Nov '07

21 Nov '07

bob blatchford wrote: > In answer to your question Enterprise Metasearch 3.0 is a third party > submission. This application is flawed and unsuitable. It has no justification in the comments to explain why the application scores in relation to each question. It needs to be referred back to the submitter for additional work. Can Rod take care of that contact or should I? Shane -- Shane Coughlan FTF Coordinator Free Software Foundation Europe Office: +41435000366 ext 408 / Mobile: +41792633406 coughlan(a)fsfeurope.org Support Free Software > http://fsfe.org

1 0

Re: CO ADMIN ACCESS - urgent
by Shane Martin Coughlan 20 Nov '07

20 Nov '07

Shane Martin Coughlan wrote: > Rod Norman wrote: >> To access, login as usual and you will find a 'Certify products' tab >> where the outstanding products requiring certification will be listed. >> After opening an outstanding product you can check the Submit button to >> formally certify the product. The product will then be available in the >> search pages through the following url as these are not currently >> visible to users (www.certifiedopen.com/co_search_product >> <http://www.certifiedopen.com/co_search_product>) > > Rod, thank you. > Now, we need to work together on processing requests coming through the > database. Both you and I need to sign-off on each request. We will > need to communicate via email to do that right now I guess. > I logged into the database right now and I notice there is one pending item. > Enterprise Metasearch 3.0 > Is this one of ours or has it been created by a third party? Rob, I got no reply from you on this issue and it's now four days old. If this is an external submission we need to make a decision on it ASAP. Shane -- Shane Coughlan FTF Coordinator Free Software Foundation Europe Office: +41435000366 ext 408 / Mobile: +41792633406 coughlan(a)fsfeurope.org Support Free Software > http://fsfe.org

1 0

Breaking Down Digital Barriers - International Study Examines Interoperability
by Shane Martin Coughlan 16 Nov '07

16 Nov '07

Please find below a research programme sponsored by Microsoft that we will have to engage with over the coming months. In essence is says that interoperability needs to be driven by the private sector and that it means different things in different contexts. I believe this research will be quietly used to suggest that government involvement in driving interoperability should be minimal (a standard Microsoft line) and that a contextual approach to interoperability suggests that complete interoperability is not possible in all situations. Sentences like "The goal is not interoperability per se, but rather something to which interoperability can lead, such as innovation or consumer choice." should be viewed with extreme suspicion. My opinion as a political scientist and linguist is that this is nonsense dressed up in vague terms. From: [1]pmckiernan(a)cyber.law.harvard.edu To: [2]press-report-list(a)eon.law.harvard.edu Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:21:06 -0500 Subject: RELEASE: Breaking Down Digital Barriers - International Study Examines Interoperability PRESS RELEASE Contact: Patrick McKiernan FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE (617) 384-9100 November 14, 2007 [3]pmckiernan(a)cyber.law.havard.edu Breaking Down Digital Barriers: International Study Examines the Issue of Interoperability Innovation, consumer choice and competition most important considerations Private sector well-suited to lead interoperability efforts WASHINGTON, DC -- The findings of an international study released today researchers from the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School and the Research Center for Information Law, University of St. Gallen indicate that private sector leadership, more so than government intervention, is the optimal method for ensuring that technologies work well together and innovation flourishes. The authors of "Breaking Down Digital Barriers: When and How ICT Interoperability Drives Innovation" found that interoperability is generally good for consumers and drives innovation, but determined that there is no "silver bullet" solution to the issue. Interoperability has increasingly become more important because computer users -- whether they be consumers, businesses, or governments -- now tend to obtain hardware and software from different vendors and expect everything to work together. One approach to the issue that has received attention advocates government-mandated adoption of specific technologies to compel interoperability. This study suggests that such approaches are unlikely to be the optimal approach to interoperability. "Interoperability leads to innovation and many benefits for consumers," said co-principal investigator John Palfrey, Executive Director of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society. "The case studies we investigated produced clear conclusions: The ICT industry is achieving considerable interoperability every day in response to the needs of customers. There is often more than one way to achieve interoperability. Market-driven initiatives tend to provide the most long-term promise." "This research demonstrates that there is no standard application to achieve ICT interoperability," said Urs Gasser, co-principal investigator and Director of the Research Center for Information Law. "Attempting to impose universal answers can produce unintended consequences such as curtailing innovation, limiting consumer choice and reducing competition. Instead, each situation needs to be analyzed on its own, to determine the best way to achieve interoperability. Nor can we forget that interoperability is simply a means to larger and more important goals, such as consumer choice, access to content, ease of use and diversity." The key findings The research focused on three case studies in which the issues of interoperability and innovation are uppermost: digital rights management in online and offline music distribution models; various models of digital identity systems (how computing systems identify users to provide the correct level of access and security); and web services (in which computer applications or programs connect with each other over the Internet to provide specific services to customers). The core finding is that "increased levels of ICT interoperability generally foster innovation. But interoperability also contributes to other socially desirable outcomes. In our three case studies, we have studied its positive impact on consumer choice, ease of use, access to content, and diversity, among other things." The investigation reached other, more nuanced conclusions: * Interoperability does not mean the same thing in every context and as such, is not always good for everyone all the time. For example, if one wants completely secure software, then that software should probably have limited interoperability. In other words, there is no one-size-fits-all way to achieve interoperability in the ICT context. * Interoperability can be achieved by multiple means including the licensing of intellectual property, product design, collaboration with partners, development of standards and governmental intervention. The easiest way to make a product from one company work well with a product from another company, for instance, may be for the companies to cross license their technologies. But in a different situation, another approach (collaboration or open standards) may be more effective and efficient. * The best path to interoperability depends greatly upon context and which subsidiary goals matter most, such as prompting further innovation, providing consumer choice or ease of use, and the spurring of competition in the field. * The private sector generally should lead interoperability efforts. The public sector should stand by either to lend a supportive hand or to determine if its involvement is warranted. Recommendations The authors of the study propose a process constructed around a set of guidelines to help businesses and governments determine the best way to achieve interoperability in a given situation. This approach may have policy implications for governments. * Identify what the actual end goal or goals are. The goal is not interoperability per se, but rather something to which interoperability can lead, such as innovation or consumer choice. * Consider the facts of the situation. The key variables that should be considered include time, maturity of the relevant technologies and markets and user practices and norms. * In light of these goals and facts of the situation, consider possible options against the benchmarks proposed by the study: effectiveness, efficiency and flexibility. * Remain open to the possibility of one or more approaches to interoperability, which may also be combined with one another to accomplish interoperability that drives innovation. * In some instances, it may be possible to convene all relevant stakeholders to participate in a collaborative, open standards process. In other instances, the relevant facts may suggest that a single firm can drive innovation by offering to others the chance to collaborate through an open API, such as Facebook?s recent success in permitting third-party applications to run on its platform. But long-term sustainability may be an issue where a single firm makes an open API available according to a contract that it can change at any time. * In the vast majority of cases, the private sector can and does accomplish a high level of interoperability on its own. The state may help by playing a convening role, or even in mandating a standard on which there is widespread agreement within industry after a collaborative process. The state may need to play a role after the fact to ensure that market actors do not abuse their positions. The report and case studies can be downloaded at [4]http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/interop. The research was sponsored by Microsoft Corporation. ### The Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School is proud to celebrate its tenth year as a research program founded to explore cyberspace, share in its study, and help pioneer its development. Founded in 1997, through a generous gift from Jack N. and Lillian R. Berkman, the Center is now home to an ever-growing community of faculty, fellows, staff, and affiliates working on projects that span the broad range of intersections between cyberspace, technology, and society. More information can be found at [5]http://cyber.law.harvard.edu. The Research Center for Information Law, FIR-HSG, was established in 2000 by University of St. Gallen professors Jean Nicolas Druey, Herbert Burkert, and Rainer J. Schweizer. The research initiatives of the Center are aimed at analyzing and assessing legal frameworks and provisions that are regulating the creation, distribution, access, and usage of information in a given social subsystem such as the economic, cultural or political system; exploring the dynamic changes in information technologies and their impacts on the legal system. More information can be found at [6]http://www.fir.unisg.ch/. **** To change your Berkman Center subscriptions, visit the following url: [7]http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/signup References 1. mailto:pmckiernan@cyber.law.harvard.edu 2. mailto:press-report-list@eon.law.harvard.edu 3. mailto:pmckiernan@cyber.law.havard.edu 4. http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/interop 5. http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/ 6. http://www.fir.unisg.ch/ 7. http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/signup

1 1

CO Next question
by bob blatchford 15 Nov '07

15 Nov '07

All We now have our first trial customer who has put up a product. This is now awaiting confirmation of certification from CO. What should the process be during the trial period: a) automatically certify with a note to submitter stating that all products will be reviewed before going live (remember the products will not be able to be viewed by anyone else) b) setup panel immediately to review each submission before certification is authorised (will delay peoples ability to see there certified products c) Any other ideas? It does raise a question regarding the database search not being available during the trial. If you are a casual browser you read about the trial but can't see any visible evidence that the trial is underway. I think we are missing an opportunity to better demonstrate what we are doing, I will investigate the possibility of CO authorising certain products that can be displayed during the trial period to allow a better assessment to be made of the service.

4 3

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

co-board November 2007