Posted by: Administrator
on April 18, 2007 03:21 AM
If you are the same person who posted earlier about being a Linux advocate and user for the last 8 years, you sure do have your systems messed up.
Open Standards != Open Source
Open standards - think HTML for web pages (REAL HTML as designated by the W3C consortia, not the stupidized stuff that MS tries to push as a standard that is incompatible with W3C) is an international standard that is controlled by an international agency. Where does open source come into the picture when describing HTML? IE (proprietary program) can use the W3C standardized HTML format just as well as the proprietary crap that MS puts into it.
The legislation was added to look into open STANDARDS, not open SOURCE. Just because the open source programs do standards better than most proprietary programs should give you something of a clue.
And, just to remind you - there should be legislation dictating open STANDARDS (rather than open source, which you keep confusing between the two), since not every one has the ability to afford proprietary programs in order to read PUBLIC documents. you seem to keep missing that point repeatedly as well.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:Issues Are Endless
Posted by: Administrator on April 18, 2007 03:21 AMOpen Standards != Open Source
Open standards - think HTML for web pages (REAL HTML as designated by the W3C consortia, not the stupidized stuff that MS tries to push as a standard that is incompatible with W3C) is an international standard that is controlled by an international agency. Where does open source come into the picture when describing HTML? IE (proprietary program) can use the W3C standardized HTML format just as well as the proprietary crap that MS puts into it.
The legislation was added to look into open STANDARDS, not open SOURCE. Just because the open source programs do standards better than most proprietary programs should give you something of a clue.
And, just to remind you - there should be legislation dictating open STANDARDS (rather than open source, which you keep confusing between the two), since not every one has the ability to afford proprietary programs in order to read PUBLIC documents. you seem to keep missing that point repeatedly as well.
#