improving http://documentfreedom.org/Open_Standards

[Timo Juhani Lindfors]

Hi,

the definition given at

http://documentfreedom.org/Open_Standards

is somewhat abstract. I know that the definition is still
controversial but I think the following would benefit an average user
browsing the site:

1) add a list of common standards that people use (zip, HTML,
Microsoft Word, tar, RTF, MP3, Ogg Theora).

2) for each item on the list: go through points 1-5 and discuss why
they might apply or not might not apply.

3) for each item on the list: give an overall conclusion and potential
list of alternative standards.

I do not think this list needs to be long. It just has to name
something concrete for the average to have something to think
about.


I added some entries at

http://documentfreedom.org/Talk:Open_Standards

but I was unable to complete the table since I was not quite sure
about points 4 and 5. Particularly point 4 was hard since I do not
undesrstand the organizational structure of xiph.org that manages ogg
vorbis. Point 5 was hard since I do not understand what "a complete
implementation equally available to all parties" exactly
means. Doesn't a non-free implementation fulfil point 5? Is that
intended?


Finally, the text of the Open_Standards page seems to be copied from

http://www.fsfe.org/projects/os/def.en.html

which is under "Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire
article is permitted in any medium, provided this notice is
preserved.". Is copyright assignment to FSFE required to get changes
accepted "upstream"? ;-)