Soutenir les standards ouverts en Europe

Le 29 juin 2007, l'agence IDABC de la Commission Européenne a publié un document réalisé sur commande par l'agence de consultants Gartner pour amorcer la révision de
European Interoperability Framework (EIF) and the Architecture Guidelines (AG) .

La première version de ce document très important, publiée en 2004, affichait une préférence nette pour les standards ouverts et le format XML pour l'échange de données en Europe, entre les administrations aussi bien que des administrations vers les citoyens.
Ce document a été relayé et utilisé dans de nombreux pays pour y soutenir les standards ouverts également.

This is now threatened in this new report EIF v2.0 by Gartner

This second version, not yet endorsed by the European Commission, nor by the member states, but that could well enter soon such an endorsement process, wants to update the previous version of the European Interoperability Framework but, contrary to the first version, it threatens explictely the good process of more open standards that had been a long time push of IDABC.

On page 28, we can find

Gartner recommends not to focus on open standards per se

migration towards open standards when appropriate in the long run

or longer, in context :

Allow open standards and other recognized standards to coexist

Gartner acknowledges the importance of open standards. IT vendors and system integrators should also recognize that open standards are the way to go. The era where proprietary standards lead to a sure base of loyal customers is fading away. IT is becoming just like any other industry where true added value and competitive pricing determine the winners.
Yet, Gartner recommends not to focus on the use of open standards per se. Whether open or not, standards are to further the deployment of public services. EIF v2.0 should facilitate the most profitable business model(s) of cost versus public value, under proper recognition of intellectual property rights, if any. The support for multiple standards allows a migration towards open standards when appropriate in the long run.

The use of 'open source' software may further the deployment of public services. However again, whether open source or not, it is the most viable software that should be allowed to survive in the infrastructure. So again, EIF v2.0 should facilitate multiple options to co-exist, and to compete.

Hopefully, now, we, the civil society, have an opportunity to react effectively, has said in the report :

Everyone who sees interoperability as an effective means to come to better pan-European eGovernment services is invited to read the document and reflect on its content.

IDABC is interested in your reactions.

A summary of reactions (that reach us before September 15, 2007) will be published on the IDABC web-site (http://ec.europa.eu/idabc) and will constitute another input into the revision process.

Please help us with the following actions :

  1. read in details the documents such as EIF v2.0 by Gartner
  2. collect on this site the points that needs attentions,
  3. collect your signatures of the associated petition, and your own constructive comments, and
  4. let your friends and contacts know that their inputs herein are effectively important.

Please help us translate this page to any language of the countries of the European member states to broaden our reach.

We shall send all these comments as a well as the petition on September 10 2007.

Thanks you for your support help

Support open standards everywhere in all Europe, especially by administrations and states

On the content of EIF v2.0, I ask

  1. that EIF v2.0 recommends the use of open standards, as defined in the definition given by EIF v1.0 for all exchanges by public institutions and states, as did the EIF v1.0 document,
  2. that recommends the use of open source software, by public institutions and states, as did the EIF v1.0 document,
  3. that EIF v2.0 recommends the use of open standards for all communications ( eg. documents, videos, sounds …) they publish, to and with the public for example on their websites, by the public institutions in Europe, at the European Commission and all the member states, and conform to open standards for the tools they provide,

On the elaboration process of EIF v2.0, I ask

  1. for the explicite public consultation during a sufficiently long time, for the redaction of such an important report as EIF v2.0,
  2. for the explicite participation of SMEs and a majority of members states for such a consultation and document redaction.
Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License