Changes between Version 1 and Version 2 of NYSRFPC122807

Timestamp:

Jan 8, 2008 9:59:22 PM (5 years ago)

Author:

dkg

Comment:

--

NYSRFPC122807

@@ -3 +3 @@
 = Background =
 In 2007 and early 2008, New York State issued a 
-[http://www.oft.state.ny.us/oftnews/erecords-study.htm Request For Public Comment concerning electronic record policy] for government documents.  This is an attempt to craft a response to that call for comments.
+[http://www.oft.state.ny.us/oftnews/erecords-study.htm Request For Public Comment concerning electronic record policy] for government documents.  This is an attempt to craft a response to that call for comments.  The public comment period runs until 2008-01-18.  If you have comments for the state to read, you should mail them to `erecords-study@oft.state.ny.us`.  You should also publish them so others can read the arguments.
 
+If you feel that these arguments resonate with you, feel free to copy or cite them in your responses to the State.  And of course, this is the web: you should always feel free to link to this page.
 
 = Freedom as a Fundamental Goal =
@@ -57 +58 @@
 operating systems, users are not allowed to modify or redistribute
 these players, and the license of the format specification itself
-prohibits use of the specification to make another player.
+prohibits use of the specification to make another player.  This lack of liberty (despite the absence of cost for those platforms provided) means that the public is required to make some sort of arrangement with Adobe (a specific private company) in order to access public data.  Since Adobe has no requirement to interact with the public in an evenhanded way, and citizens have no legal recourse to accessing the data themselves, they are effectively discouraged from accessing it.
 
 
@@ -66 +67 @@
 > partners and other jurisdictions?
 
+Free formats, standards, and tools encourage interoperability and data sharing because there is no restriction on adoption for the other parties in communication.
+
+If NYS was to choose a proprietary format for electronic records, it would need to pay the proprietor of that format a fee for its use.  If a neighboring jurisdiction was to choose a proprietary format for electronic records, it would ''also'' need to pay the proprietor a fee for its use.  If the two jurisdictions happened to choose different proprietary formats, then both jurisdictions will need to pay fees to both vendors if interoperability is desired.
+
+While this would be a windfall for the vendors, the costs to each jurisdiction scale exponentially as the number of jurisdictions desiring mutual interoperability grows.  Better to choose free interchange standards so that there are no additional per-jurisdiction per-vendor costs due to the proprietary nature of the records. 
 
 = Encouraging appropriate government control =
@@ -72 +78 @@
 > electronic records?
 
+Free formats, standards, and tools allow governments (and other entities) to retain control over their own data.
+
+As a fictional example, consider sanitation district boundary records stored in GBG format in 1995.  GBG was (fictionally) owned at the time by Dispatch Service Co., which specialized in sanitation logistics.  Fast forward to 2008: DSCo has decided that it does not want to support the format any longer (or has been sold to a parent company uninterested in sanitation logistics, or has simply collapsed).  The State is now in a weak position to have any access to tools needed for modifying garbage truck routes.
+
+Choosing free formats and free tools from the beginning would allow the government better control over the data because it would be insulated from the fate of any particular instance of DSCo.
+
 = Encouraging choice and vendor neutrality =
 > 5. What mechanisms and processes should the State of New York
 > consider for encouraging choice and vendor neutrality when creating,
 > maintaining, exchanging and preserving its electronic records?
+
+Free formats, standards, and tools avoid vendor-lock-in and promote competitive industry.
+
+As in the above example with sanitation logistics, choosing free formats and free tools would let NYS negotiate among any vendor to meet its sanitation dispatch needs.  Even if DSCo was still a thriving, healthy corporation, if the formats and tools used were all free, it would be forced to compete with any other entity willing to do the work needed by the city.  The underlying freedom translates into a better negotiating position for the State, and encourages healthy competition and interoperability among the potential vendors.
 
 = Electronic record life cycle =