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"? ;-)