Dear RMS, I think its futile to chase ISO anymore. We would only land up spending our own creative energy which we can't afford to at this pace.
" * Market-driven
ISO only develops standards for which there is a market requirement. The work is mainly carried out by experts from the industrial, technical and business sectors which have asked for the standards, and which subsequently put them to use." .. in their own words at http://www.iso.org/iso/about/discover-iso_the-iso-brand.htm
Why should Free Software Foundation and other like minded organisations allow ISO to take over software standards and make it - only *market-driven* one ?
Its not difficult to realise that the *very conditions* that necessitated a Standards Organisation to be promoted, are now prevalent and omnipresent.
Why not create another organisation that develops standards for the common world citizens to communicate with freedom ?
Shouldn't we ask ourselves now about this, and try to define the *framework* that would set in motion a new organisation which would be able to come out with Free/Open Standards after *defining* them in as unambigous terms as possible ?
CK Raju, MES College of Engineering, Kuttippuram Kerala, India
hello Mr. raju. perfect suggestion well said. in the first place why should free standards be slaves of any standard's organisation which has a reputation of creating standards for *purely business*. how does ISO declaring a certain thing as standards relate to freedom. afterall a complete free standard (as in freedom ) must not come from just an organisation but community. and we need to create some kind of a system where such a community driven infrastructure can be put in place. happy hacking. Krishnakant.
On 18/04/2008, CK Raju, Thrissur ck.thrissur@gmail.com wrote:
Dear RMS, I think its futile to chase ISO anymore. We would only land up spending our own creative energy which we can't afford to at this pace.
" * Market-driven
ISO only develops standards for which there is a market requirement. The work is mainly carried out by experts from the industrial, technical and business sectors which have asked for the standards, and which subsequently put them to use." .. in their own words at http://www.iso.org/iso/about/discover-iso_the-iso-brand.htm
Why should Free Software Foundation and other like minded organisations allow ISO to take over software standards and make it - only *market-driven* one ?
Its not difficult to realise that the *very conditions* that necessitated a Standards Organisation to be promoted, are now prevalent and omnipresent.
Why not create another organisation that develops standards for the common world citizens to communicate with freedom ?
Shouldn't we ask ourselves now about this, and try to define the *framework* that would set in motion a new organisation which would be able to come out with Free/Open Standards after *defining* them in as unambigous terms as possible ?
CK Raju, MES College of Engineering, Kuttippuram Kerala, India _______________________________________________ Fsf-friends mailing list Fsf-friends@mm.gnu.org.in http://mm.gnu.org.in/mailman/listinfo/fsf-friends
On 4/18/08, CK Raju, Thrissur ck.thrissur@gmail.com wrote:
Why not create another organisation that develops standards for the common world citizens to communicate with freedom ?
Shouldn't we ask ourselves now about this, and try to define the *framework* that would set in motion a new organisation which would be able to come out with Free/Open Standards after *defining* them in as unambigous terms as possible ?
Can FreedDesktop.org expand it's scope to fill in this GAP?
Hello Friends/Community,
Well what i felt like after reading this letter is "hey i dont like to be part of this group, i will start another group". I dont think it is a good idea to start a group for each purpose if one group can serve the purpose.
ISO is a standards organization and be it for business or anything, it shouldn't have made such a mistake. And even if it has made a mistake, as a member of the community i think it is our duty to correct it. ISO standards are followed everywhere and our aim is to spread Free Software, people should be Free and how can we keep quiet on seeing such a mistake where people can be misled. Our aim is not to create double standards, and creating another group/standard is equivalent to that.
We fight to get justice, people cannot be misled by a mistake caused by an Organization. If it is not us, then who will do it?
Please see http://fsfeurope.org/documents/msooxml-questions.pdf
Find mail from ck.thrissur@gmail.com below:
Anoop Jacob Thomas Trivandrum, Kerala (www.ilug-tvm.org)
*On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 11:27 AM, CK Raju, Thrissur ck.thrissur@gmail.com wrote: *
*Dear RMS, I think its futile to chase ISO anymore. We would only land up spending our own creative energy which we can't afford to at this pace.
" * Market-driven
ISO only develops standards for which there is a market requirement. The work is mainly carried out by experts from the industrial, technical and business sectors which have asked for the standards, and which subsequently put them to use." .. in their own words at http://www.iso.org/iso/about/discover-iso_the-iso-brand.htm
Why should Free Software Foundation and other like minded organisations allow ISO to take over software standards and make it - only *market-driven* one ?
Its not difficult to realise that the *very conditions* that necessitated a Standards Organisation to be promoted, are now prevalent and omnipresent.
Why not create another organisation that develops standards for the common world citizens to communicate with freedom ?
Shouldn't we ask ourselves now about this, and try to define the *framework* that would set in motion a new organisation which would be able to come out with Free/Open Standards after *defining* them in as unambigous terms as possible ?
CK Raju, MES College of Engineering, Kuttippuram Kerala, India ______________________________* *_________________ Fsf-friends mailing list Fsf-friends@mm.gnu.org.in http://mm.gnu.org.in/mailman/listinfo/fsf-friends
-- Anoop Jacob Thomas (www.ilug-tvm.org)
hi anoop. I do respect your feelings and passion about the issue and freedom in general. while it is true idealy, but what you propose is not really practical because there are some issues which can't be discussed on the mailing list and we all know about those underhand money tactics which all companies play to get ISO standard. secondly ISO is about standards and not necessarily about "open " standards. if it believes for example, that ooxml is a standard it could be due to many reasons on and off the table. the idea was not about "double " standards as you said, it is about a community platform to approve open standards purely ment for freedom of common man. happy hacking. Krishnakant.
On 18/04/2008, Anoop Jacob Thomas anoopjt@gmail.com wrote:
Hello Friends/Community,
Well what i felt like after reading this letter is "hey i dont like to be part of this group, i will start another group". I dont think it is a good idea to start a group for each purpose if one group can serve the purpose.
ISO is a standards organization and be it for business or anything, it shouldn't have made such a mistake. And even if it has made a mistake, as a member of the community i think it is our duty to correct it. ISO standards are followed everywhere and our aim is to spread Free Software, people should be Free and how can we keep quiet on seeing such a mistake where people can be misled. Our aim is not to create double standards, and creating another group/standard is equivalent to that.
We fight to get justice, people cannot be misled by a mistake caused by an Organization. If it is not us, then who will do it?
Please see http://fsfeurope.org/documents/msooxml-questions.pdf
Find mail from ck.thrissur@gmail.com below:
Anoop Jacob Thomas Trivandrum, Kerala (www.ilug-tvm.org)
*On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 11:27 AM, CK Raju, Thrissur ck.thrissur@gmail.com wrote:
*Dear RMS, I think its futile to chase ISO anymore. We would only land up spending our own creative energy which we can't afford to at this pace.
" * Market-driven
ISO only develops standards for which there is a market requirement. The work is mainly carried out by experts from the industrial, technical and business sectors which have asked for the standards, and which subsequently put them to use." .. in their own words at http://www.iso.org/iso/about/discover-iso_the-iso-brand.htm
Why should Free Software Foundation and other like minded organisations allow ISO to take over software standards and make it - only *market-driven* one ?
Its not difficult to realise that the *very conditions* that necessitated a Standards Organisation to be promoted, are now prevalent and omnipresent.
Why not create another organisation that develops standards for the common world citizens to communicate with freedom ?
Shouldn't we ask ourselves now about this, and try to define the *framework* that would set in motion a new organisation which would be able to come out with Free/Open Standards after *defining* them in as unambigous terms as possible ?
CK Raju, MES College of Engineering, Kuttippuram Kerala, India ______________________________* *_________________ Fsf-friends mailing list Fsf-friends@mm.gnu.org.in http://mm.gnu.org.in/mailman/listinfo/fsf-friends
-- Anoop Jacob Thomas (www.ilug-tvm.org)
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 11:36 PM, Richard Stallman rms@gnu.org wrote:
I don't think our community has the strength to define standards on our own.
Why should we insist that a community should have the strength first to initiate this process, let's accept ourselves as weak, and set off.
Experts could start with certain "community standards" for software, have a procedure for standards to arrive and be there (if need be, for phasing out, as well).
We could even accept certain ISO standards, if they fall within the scope of our definition.
Isolated FSUGs around the globe could do wonders here.
Independant activists like me could then wait for the next horror to be analysed.
CK Raju Thrissur
-
Anoop Jacob Thomas -
CK Raju, Thrissur -
krishnakant Mane -
Laxminarayan Kamath -
Richard Stallman