Dear Maël,
I’m sorry for the late and rather short and simplified reply.
The statement about Slovenia in the document is not complete — the December 2013 document is a proposal for changes and analysis of the 2010 status.
The 2010 status is referred there, because based on EIF, Slovenian government has in 2007 written up a strategy document called “si2010”¹ to increase the government’s use and support for Open Formats, Free Software, Open Data by 2010.
I’m CC-ing the Slovenian Fellowship list, so other members can also send you their corrections.
cheers, Matija —— [1] si2010 http://www.arhiv.mvzt.gov.si/si/delovna_podrocja/informacijska_druzba/strate...
Die 10. 01. 14 et hora 18:26:45 scripsis:
Dear Maël,
thank you for te mail, but as you can see below, it is broken and I don’t see any attachments — just a stream of quoted binary info.
Die 10. 01. 14 et hora 17:27:09 scripsis:
--047d7b86c3e8a1478604efa03299 Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="047d7b86c3e8a1478104efa03297"
--047d7b86c3e8a1478104efa03297 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello,
Thanks again for your input to this document. It could clearly still be expanded and completed with more examples but as you know we have a hard deadline in that the UKG consultation is closing on January 15. This is only one section in our response (main doc attached just for info) and
the
goal is not to be exhaustive but rather show that there is no lack of successful implementations of the standard. Can I please ask you to review before Tuesday 14 (sorry for the short deadline!) and check that the information you provided is appropriately reflected in the document, and that you are OK with your name being mentioned in the sources. I plan on updating this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument_adoption with some the information collected - some of it is quite out of date.
Best regards,
Mael