定义开放标准:政策与实践的比较

Stephen Mutkoski
{"title":"定义开放标准:政策与实践的比较","authors":"Stephen Mutkoski","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1945252","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Governments around the world have taken an increasing interest in the use of “Open Standards” in the ICT systems that they deploy. That interest has manifested itself in several recent policies, including ones issued since November 2010 by the European Commission, the Government of India and the UK Cabinet Office. These policies ultimately raise as many questions as they answer about how we might delineate the confines of the term “Open Standard” and which commonly used standards would measure up to that requirement. Contrary to popular belief, there is not a single accepted definition of the term “Open Standard” and in fact each of the policies defines that term differently. Part I of this paper looks at the concept of “openness,” using five dimensions or attributes. Part II introduces the three recent government standards policies and explains how each one approaches the concept of openness, with reference to these five attributes. Part III of the paper suggests that while the definitions in these policies may seem clear on their face, when applied to real world practices at SSOs, the definitions will disqualify a non-trivial number of standards currently in use by governments around the world. Part IV summarizes the findings and considers several other policy questions related to the frequently cited objectives for these “Open Standards” Policies, concluding that we should ask questions about whether the policies outlined above can deliver on those objectives in light of the analysis in Part II.","PeriodicalId":386043,"journal":{"name":"2011 7th International Conference on Standardization and Innovation in Information Technology (SIIT)","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Defining Open Standards: A comparison of policy and practice\",\"authors\":\"Stephen Mutkoski\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1945252\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Governments around the world have taken an increasing interest in the use of “Open Standards” in the ICT systems that they deploy. That interest has manifested itself in several recent policies, including ones issued since November 2010 by the European Commission, the Government of India and the UK Cabinet Office. These policies ultimately raise as many questions as they answer about how we might delineate the confines of the term “Open Standard” and which commonly used standards would measure up to that requirement. Contrary to popular belief, there is not a single accepted definition of the term “Open Standard” and in fact each of the policies defines that term differently. Part I of this paper looks at the concept of “openness,” using five dimensions or attributes. Part II introduces the three recent government standards policies and explains how each one approaches the concept of openness, with reference to these five attributes. Part III of the paper suggests that while the definitions in these policies may seem clear on their face, when applied to real world practices at SSOs, the definitions will disqualify a non-trivial number of standards currently in use by governments around the world. Part IV summarizes the findings and considers several other policy questions related to the frequently cited objectives for these “Open Standards” Policies, concluding that we should ask questions about whether the policies outlined above can deliver on those objectives in light of the analysis in Part II.\",\"PeriodicalId\":386043,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2011 7th International Conference on Standardization and Innovation in Information Technology (SIIT)\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-10-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2011 7th International Conference on Standardization and Innovation in Information Technology (SIIT)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1945252\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2011 7th International Conference on Standardization and Innovation in Information Technology (SIIT)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1945252","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

世界各国政府对在其部署的信息通信技术系统中使用“开放标准”越来越感兴趣。这种兴趣在最近的几项政策中有所体现,包括欧盟委员会(European Commission)、印度政府和英国内阁办公室自2010年11月以来发布的政策。这些政策最终提出的问题与它们回答的问题一样多,即我们如何界定“开放标准”一词的范围,以及哪些常用标准符合这一要求。与普遍的看法相反,“开放标准”一词并没有一个公认的定义,事实上,每个策略对该术语的定义都不同。本文的第一部分着眼于“开放”的概念,使用五个维度或属性。第二部分介绍了最近的三个政府标准政策,并解释了它们是如何根据这五个属性来处理开放概念的。论文的第三部分表明,虽然这些政策中的定义表面上看起来很清楚,但当应用于社会服务组织的实际实践时,这些定义将使世界各国政府目前使用的大量标准失去资格。第四部分总结了调查结果,并考虑了与这些“开放标准”政策经常被引用的目标相关的其他几个政策问题,结论是,根据第二部分的分析,我们应该询问上述政策是否能够实现这些目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Defining Open Standards: A comparison of policy and practice
Governments around the world have taken an increasing interest in the use of “Open Standards” in the ICT systems that they deploy. That interest has manifested itself in several recent policies, including ones issued since November 2010 by the European Commission, the Government of India and the UK Cabinet Office. These policies ultimately raise as many questions as they answer about how we might delineate the confines of the term “Open Standard” and which commonly used standards would measure up to that requirement. Contrary to popular belief, there is not a single accepted definition of the term “Open Standard” and in fact each of the policies defines that term differently. Part I of this paper looks at the concept of “openness,” using five dimensions or attributes. Part II introduces the three recent government standards policies and explains how each one approaches the concept of openness, with reference to these five attributes. Part III of the paper suggests that while the definitions in these policies may seem clear on their face, when applied to real world practices at SSOs, the definitions will disqualify a non-trivial number of standards currently in use by governments around the world. Part IV summarizes the findings and considers several other policy questions related to the frequently cited objectives for these “Open Standards” Policies, concluding that we should ask questions about whether the policies outlined above can deliver on those objectives in light of the analysis in Part II.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
R&D coordination in standard setting organizations: The role of consortia Showcase: A database for standards and patents Configuration management of a system of interdependent standards Technology standards battles and business networks during the technology life cycle: Propositions and a plan for further research Making innovation happen: The role of standards and openness in an innovation-friendly ecosystem
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1