That tabel of standards would be nice, but it may be more difficult to produce than it seems.
I'm running out of time, I hope it's ok to send my observations here...
Open Standards are essential for interoperability and freedom of choice based on the merits of different software applications. They provide freedom from data lock-in and the subsequent vendor lock-in. This makes Open Standards essential for governments, companies, organisations and individual users of information technology. While Open Standards are generally agreed upon as a very important issue and goal, the definition of "Open Standard" is still somewhat controversial.
Is not that controversial, it's more like abused. I think open standards are to software as democracy is to society. We achieve it in varying degrees, we sacrify it too often in pursuit of misperceived comfort and we suffer the consequences, we all know what it is about but we could argue very long to define it very precisely, but we all agree you shouldn't believe it's there in a particular case merely because someone says so.
- without any components or extensions that have dependencies on
formats or protocols that do not meet the definition of an Open Standard themselves;
It's not very very clear whether this means any such extension you add to the standard does not constitute part of the standard and such extension should be avoided or once somebody adds such an extension to an standard the standard cease to be open and the standard should be avoided.
- free from legal or technical clauses that limit its utilisation
by any party or in any business model;
Legally encumbered standards are often not encumbered by clauses in the standard itself. And of course in places with software patents legal encumbrances might even be submarine. This makes it difficult to phrase this condition. On the other hands there might be fair limits to use (GPL ? trademarks not allowing to call an implementation compliant if it isn't ?).
- available in multiple complete implementations by competing vendors, or as a complete implementation equally available to all parties.
weak? "equally available" is enough ?
Visible effects of Open Standards are that you can:
* Choose any operating system or application and still be able to read and edit all your old documents. * Collaborate with others regardless of which software they are using. * Use any software of your choice to interact with your government.
I agree this is hyperbolic, I'd write it more like
* Greater choice in operating system, hardware or application while still being able to read and edit your old documents.
* Greater possibilities to collaborate with others using different software (which becomes a right when collaboration is required, like with governments)
* Greater reach by removing requirements to access your message
(interacting with governmetn isn't merely a case of interacting with others? )
* lower taxes as a result of more effective governmental IT solutions that avoid the cost of lock-in
Already said. At least we shoudl allow democratic governments to chose whether any saving go to increased coverages,services or quality or they go to lower taxes.
More information on Open Standards
There used to be a definition of Open Standards by IDABC that I liked. I'm not sure it's still current, unfortunately... I don't know where to find it right now.