Jesper Lund Stockholm has posted this comment to my blogpost about the implementation manual: http://lodahl.blogspot.com/2007/12/now-its-getting-operational.html#c8036683144354266846
- Thank you for that Jesper.
Jesper claims that according to a technical report, it's clearly not realistic to do a clean ODF implementation in the public sector.
I must say that I'm disappointed with the project in the Danish IT- and Tele Agency. From the Parliament came a clear message: use open standards for exchanging office documents. But the Agency has managed to shave the decision down to "Use open standards or Microsoft for text documents- if you find it appropriate".
To Jesper I will say: the technical report you are referring to is taken out of its context. You know that this report is written based on a decision of dual standards. A situation where we know that to kinds of documents formats will live side by side. In this scenario there will be a lot of document conversion every day - from now and forever. If the decision had been one standard only, there would only be initial conversion of a lot of documents. Later on, conversion of documents would happen only rarely.
How come it's not realistic in Denmark when it already happens in France, Norway, Brazil and many other countries ? What is it that makes it different in Denmark ?
Del.icio.us
1 comment:
Hi Leif,
Yes - you are right that the report is made on the basis of a decision of using the two open formats, ODF and OOXML, but having only one format would not make the problems identified go away. Also, you are asking your questions the wrong way. The question you need to answer is:
1. Why do you think it makes sense to compare the IT-departments of a Government like Denmark's to the Government of Brazil?
2. You point to a list of OOo-implementations. However, to be able to use the list as part of an "argument" you need to also supply a list of their corresponding conclusions of the implementations. Where is this list?
Jesper Lund Stocholm
idippedut.dk
Post a Comment