Misplaced Pages

#113886

33-458: Portable Contacts is an open protocol to make it easier for developers to give users a secure way to access the address books and friends lists they have accrued online. The goal of the project is to increase data portability by creating a common and open specification to bridge proprietary contacts APIs such as Google's GData Contacts API, Yahoo's Address Book API, and Microsoft's Live Contacts API. It combines OAuth , XRDS -Simple and

66-729: A royalty-free basis. Many definitions of the term standard permit patent holders to impose " reasonable and non-discriminatory licensing" royalty fees and other licensing terms on implementers or users of the standard. For example, the rules for standards published by the major internationally recognized standards bodies such as the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), International Organization for Standardization (ISO), International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), and ITU-T permit their standards to contain specifications whose implementation will require payment of patent licensing fees. Among these organizations, only

99-521: A "free software and open standards law." The decree includes the requirement that the Venezuelan public sector must use free software based on open standards, and includes a definition of open standard: Open format An open file format is a file format for storing digital data , defined by an openly published specification usually maintained by a standards organization , and which can be used and implemented by anyone. An open file format

132-657: A common patent policy under the banner of the WSC . However, the ITU-T definition should not necessarily be considered also applicable in ITU-R, ISO and IEC contexts, since the Common Patent Policy does not make any reference to "open standards" but rather only to "standards." In section 7 of its RFC 2026, the IETF classifies specifications that have been developed in a manner similar to that of

165-674: A consensus basis. The definitions of the term open standard used by academics, the European Union , and some of its member governments or parliaments such as Denmark , France , and Spain preclude open standards requiring fees for use, as do the New Zealand , South African and the Venezuelan governments. On the standard organisation side, the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) ensures that its specifications can be implemented on

198-402: A data format which is made public, is thoroughly documented and neutral with regard to the technological tools needed to peruse the same data. The E-Government Interoperability Framework (e-GIF) defines open standard as royalty-free according to the following text: While a universally agreed definition of "open standards" is unlikely to be resolved in the near future, the e-GIF accepts that

231-601: A definition of "open standards" needs to recognise a continuum that ranges from closed to open, and encompasses varying degrees of "openness." To guide readers in this respect, the e-GIF endorses "open standards" that exhibit the following properties: The e-GIF performs the same function in e-government as the Road Code does on the highways. Driving would be excessively costly, inefficient, and ineffective if road rules had to be agreed each time one vehicle encountered another. The Portuguese Open Standards Law, adopted in 2011, demands

264-528: A definition of open standards, which also is used in pan-European software development projects. It states: The French Parliament approved a definition of "open standard" in its "Law for Confidence in the Digital Economy." The definition is (Article 4): A clear royalty-free stance and far reaching requirements case is the one for India's Government 4.1 Mandatory Characteristics An Identified Standard will qualify as an "Open Standard", if it meets

297-584: A full, irrevocable and irreversible way to the Portuguese State; e) There are no restrictions to its implementation. A Law passed by the Spanish Parliament requires that all electronic services provided by the Spanish public administration must be based on open standards. It defines an open standard as royalty-free, according to the following definition (ANEXO Definiciones k): An open standard fulfills

330-588: A set of principles which have contributed to the exponential growth of the Internet and related technologies. The "OpenStand Principles" define open standards and establish the building blocks for innovation. Standards developed using the OpenStand principles are developed through an open, participatory process, support interoperability, foster global competition, are voluntarily adopted on a global level and serve as building blocks for products and services targeted to meet

363-487: A standards body and are fully documented and publicly available." The Enterprise Technical Reference Model (ETRM) classifies four formats as "Open Formats": Sun Microsystems defined the criteria for open formats as follows: According to The Linux Information Project , the term open format should refer to "any format that is published for anyone to read and study but which may or may not be encumbered by patents, copyrights or other restrictions on use" – as opposed to

SECTION 10

#1732886548114

396-456: A wide range of meanings associated with their usage. There are a number of definitions of open standards which emphasize different aspects of openness, including the openness of the resulting specification, the openness of the drafting process, and the ownership of rights in the standard. The term "standard" is sometimes restricted to technologies approved by formalized committees that are open to participation by all interested parties and operate on

429-481: A wire-format based on vCard harmonized with schema from OpenSocial . The editor of the Portable Contacts standard was Joseph Smarr of Plaxo and the project was co-maintained by Chris Messina . Portable Contacts has been used by services such as Google Contacts , Windows Live Messenger Connect , as well as other specification such as OStatus . Open protocol The terms open and standard have

462-688: Is determined by the market. The ITU-T is a standards development organization (SDO) that is one of the three sectors of the International Telecommunication Union (a specialized agency of the United Nations ). The ITU-T has a Telecommunication Standardization Bureau director's Ad Hoc group on IPR that produced the following definition in March 2005, which the ITU-T as a whole has endorsed for its purposes since November 2005: The ITU-T , ITU-R , ISO , and IEC have harmonized on

495-557: Is here meant in the sense of fulfilling the following requirements: The Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC) defines open standard as the following: Specifications for hardware and/or software that are publicly available implying that multiple vendors can compete directly based on the features and performance of their products. It also implies that the existing open system can be removed and replaced with that of another vendor with minimal effort and without major interruption. The Danish government has attempted to make

528-448: Is licensed with an open license . For example, an open format can be implemented by both proprietary and free and open-source software , using the typical software licenses used by each. In contrast to open file formats, closed file formats are considered trade secrets. Depending on the definition, the specification of an open format may require a fee to access or, very rarely, contain other restrictions. The range of meanings

561-626: Is similar to that of the term open standard . In 2012 the UK Government created the policy Open Standards Principles, stating that the Open Standards Principles apply to every aspect of government IT and that Government technology must remain open to everyone. They have seven principles for selecting open standards for use in government, following these principals many open formats were adopted, notably Open Document Format (ODF) . The seven principles for selecting open standards for use in

594-501: Is then published in the form of RFC 6852 in January 2013. The European Union defined the term for use within its European Interoperability Framework for Pan-European eGovernment Services, Version 1.0 although it does not claim to be a universal definition for all European Union use and documentation. To reach interoperability in the context of pan-European eGovernment services, guidance needs to focus on open standards. The word "open"

627-743: The GSM phones (adopted as a government standard), Open Group which promotes UNIX , and the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) which created the first standards of SMTP and TCP/IP. Buyers tend to prefer open standards which they believe offer them cheaper products and more choice for access due to network effects and increased competition between vendors. Open standards which specify formats are sometimes referred to as open formats . Many specifications that are sometimes referred to as standards are proprietary, and only available (if they can be obtained at all) under restrictive contract terms from

660-593: The "Simplified BSD License" as stated in the IETF Trust Legal Provisions and Copyright FAQ based on RFC 5377. In August 2012, the IETF combined with the W3C and IEEE to launch OpenStand and to publish The Modern Paradigm for Standards. This captures "the effective and efficient standardization processes that have made the Internet and Web the premiere platforms for innovation and borderless commerce". The declaration

693-495: The IETF and ITU-T explicitly refer to their standards as "open standards", while the others refer only to producing "standards". The IETF and ITU-T use definitions of "open standard" that allow "reasonable and non-discriminatory" patent licensing fee requirements. There are those in the open-source software community who hold that an "open standard" is only open if it can be freely adopted, implemented and extended. While open standards or architectures are considered non-proprietary in

SECTION 20

#1732886548114

726-518: The IETF itself as being "open standards," and lists the standards produced by ANSI , ISO , IEEE , and ITU-T as examples. As the IETF standardization processes and IPR policies have the characteristics listed above by ITU-T, the IETF standards fulfill the ITU-T definition of "open standards." However, the IETF has not adopted a specific definition of "open standard"; both RFC 2026 and the IETF's mission statement (RFC 3935) talks about "open process," but RFC 2026 does not define "open standard" except for

759-830: The UK government are: Within the framework of Open Government Initiative , the federal government of the United States adopted the Open Government Directive , according to which: "An open format is one that is platform independent, machine readable, and made available to the public without restrictions that would impede the re-use of that information". The State of Minnesota defines the criteria for open, XML-based file formats as follows: The Commonwealth of Massachusetts "defines open formats as specifications for data file formats that are based on an underlying open standard, developed by an open community, affirmed and maintained by

792-601: The degree of openness will be taken into account when selecting an appropriate standard: The UK government 's definition of open standards applies to software interoperability, data and document formats. The criteria for open standards are published in the "Open Standards Principles" policy paper and are as follows. The Cabinet Office in the UK recommends that government departments specify requirements using open standards when undertaking procurement exercises in order to promote interoperability and re-use, and avoid technological lock-in. The Venezuelan Government approved

825-502: The following conditions: The South African Government approved a definition in the "Minimum Interoperability Operating Standards Handbook" (MIOS). For the purposes of the MIOS, a standard shall be considered open if it meets all of these criteria. There are standards which we are obliged to adopt for pragmatic reasons which do not necessarily fully conform to being open in all respects. In such cases, where an open standard does not yet exist,

858-564: The following criteria: Italy has a general rule for the entire public sector dealing with Open Standards, although concentrating on data formats, in Art. 68 of the Code of the Digital Administration ( Codice dell'Amministrazione Digitale ) [applications must] allow representation of data under different formats, at least one being an open data format. [...] [it is defined] an open data format,

891-400: The needs of markets and consumers. This drives innovation which, in turn, contributes to the creation of new markets and the growth and expansion of existing markets. There are five, key OpenStand Principles, as outlined below: 1. Cooperation Respectful cooperation between standards organizations, whereby each respects the autonomy, integrity, processes, and intellectual property rules of

924-411: The organization that owns the copyright on the specification. As such these specifications are not considered to be fully open . Joel West has argued that "open" standards are not black and white but have many different levels of "openness". A more open standard tends to occur when the knowledge of the technology becomes dispersed enough that competition is increased and others are able to start copying

957-711: The others. 2. Adherence to Principles – Adherence to the five fundamental principles of standards development, namely 3. Collective Empowerment Commitment by affirming standards organizations and their participants to collective empowerment by striving for standards that: 4. Availability Standards specifications are made accessible to all for implementation and deployment. Affirming standards organizations have defined procedures to develop specifications that can be implemented under fair terms. Given market diversity, fair terms may vary from royalty-free to fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms (FRAND). 5. Voluntary Adoption Standards are voluntarily adopted and success

990-631: The purpose of defining what documents IETF standards can link to. RFC 2026 belongs to a set of RFCs collectively known as BCP 9 (Best Common Practice, an IETF policy). RFC 2026 was later updated by BCP 78 and 79 (among others). As of 2011 BCP 78 is RFC 5378 (Rights Contributors Provide to the IETF Trust), and BCP 79 consists of RFC 3979 (Intellectual Property Rights in IETF Technology) and a clarification in RFC 4879. The changes are intended to be compatible with

1023-480: The sense that the standard is either unowned or owned by a collective body, it can still be publicly shared and not tightly guarded. The typical example of "open source" that has become a standard is the personal computer originated by IBM and now referred to as Wintel , the combination of the Microsoft operating system and Intel microprocessor. There are three others that are most widely accepted as "open" which include

Portable Contacts - Misplaced Pages Continue

1056-693: The technology as they implement it. This occurred with the Wintel architecture as others were able to start imitating the software. Less open standards exist when a particular firm has much power (not ownership) over the standard, which can occur when a firm's platform "wins" in standard setting or the market makes one platform most popular. On August 12, 2012, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), Internet Society (ISOC), World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and Internet Architecture Board (IAB), jointly affirmed

1089-667: The use of Open Standards, and is applicable to sovereign entities, central public administration services (including decentralized services and public institutes), regional public administration services and the public sector. In it, Open Standards are defined thus: a) Its adoption is fruit off an open decision process accessible to all interested parties; b) The specifications document must have been freely published, allowing its copy, distribution and use without restrictions; c) The specifications document cannot cover undocumented actions of processes; d) The applicable intellectual property rights, including patents, have been made available in

#113886