词条 | Open standard | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
释义 |
An open standard is a standard that is publicly available and has various rights to use associated with it, and may also have various properties of how it was designed (e.g. open process). There is no single definition and interpretations vary with usage. The terms open and standard have 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 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 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 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.[1] While open standards or architectures are considered non-proprietary in the sense that the standard is either unowned or owned by a collective body, it can still be publicly shared and not tightly guarded.[2] 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 the GSM phones (adopted as a government standard), Open Group which promotes UNIX and the like, 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.[3] 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 under restrictive contract terms (if they can be obtained at all) from 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". Ultimately a standard needs{{According to whom|date=April 2015}} to be open enough that it will become adopted and accepted in the market, but still closed enough that firms can get a return on their investment in developing the technology around the standard. 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 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.[4] Specific definitions of an open standardJoint IEEE, ISOC, W3C, IETF and IAB DefinitionOn August 12, 2012, the Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), Internet Society (ISOC), World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and Internet Architecture Board (IAB), [https://open-stand.org/about-us/affirmation/ jointly affirmed] a set of principles which have contributed to the exponential growth of the Internet and related technologies. The [https://open-stand.org/about-us/principles/ “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 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. CooperationRespectful cooperation between standards organizations, whereby each respects the autonomy, integrity, processes, and intellectual property rules of the others. 2. Adherence to Principles - Adherence to the five fundamental principles of standards development, namely
Commitment by affirming standards organizations and their participants to collective empowerment by striving for standards that:
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 AdoptionStandards are voluntarily adopted and success is determined by the market. [5]ITU-T definitionThe ITU-T is a standards development organization (SDO) that is one of the three sectors of the International Telecommunications 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:[6] The ITU-T has a long history of open standards development. However, recently some different external sources have attempted to define the term "Open Standard" in a variety of different ways. In order to avoid confusion, the ITU-T uses for its purpose the term "Open Standards" per the following definition: "Open Standards" are standards made available to the general public and are developed (or approved) and maintained via a collaborative and consensus driven process. "Open Standards" facilitate interoperability and data exchange among different products or services and are intended for widespread adoption. Other elements of "Open Standards" include, but are not limited to:
The ITU-T, ITU-R, ISO, and IEC have harmonized on a common patent policy [7] 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 [8]does not make any reference to "open standards" but rather only to "standards." IETF definitionIn section 7 of its RFC 2026, the IETF classifies specifications that have been developed in a manner similar to that of 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 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).[9] 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),[10] and BCP 79 consists of RFC 3979 (Intellectual Property Rights in IETF Technology) and a clarification in RFC 4879.[11] The changes are intended to be compatible with the "Simplified BSD License" as stated in the IETF Trust Legal Provisions and Copyright FAQ based on RFC 5377.[12] In August 2012, the IETF combined with the W3C and IEEE to launch OpenStand [13] 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 is then published in the form of RFC 6852 in January 2013. European Interoperability Framework for Pan-European eGovernment ServicesThe European Union defined the term for use within its European Interoperability Framework for Pan-European eGovernment Services, Version 1.0[14] although it does not claim to be a universal definition for all European Union use and documentation.
The word "open" is here meant in the sense of fulfilling the following requirements:
Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium definitionThe 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.[16] Danish government definitionThe Danish government has attempted to make a definition of open standards,[17] which also is used in pan-European software development projects. It states:
French law definitionThe French Parliament approved a definition of "open standard" in its "Law for Confidence in the Digital Economy."[18] The definition is:[19]
Indian Government DefinitionA clear Royalty Free stance and far reaching requirements case is the one for India's Government [20] 4.1 Mandatory Characteristics Italian Law definitionItaly 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)[21]
Spanish law definitionA Law passed by the Spanish Parliament [22] 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:[19]
Venezuelan law definitionThe Venezuelan Government approved a "free software and open standards law."[23] 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:[19]
South African Government definitionThe South African Government approved a definition in the "Minimum Interoperability Operating Standards Handbook" (MIOS).[24] 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, the degree of openness will be taken into account when selecting an appropriate standard:
New Zealand official interoperability framework definitionThe E-Government Interoperability Framework (e-GIF) [25] defines open standard as royalty free according to the following text:
Bruce Perens' definitionOne of the most popular definitions of the term "open standard," as measured by Google ranking, is the one developed by Bruce Perens.[26] His definition lists a set of principles that he believes must be met by an open standard:
Microsoft's definitionVijay Kapoor, national technology officer, Microsoft, defines what open standards are as follows:[27]
Overall, Microsoft's relationship to open standards was, at best, mixed. While Microsoft participated in the most significant standard-setting organizations that establish open standards, it was often seen as oppositional to their adoption.[28] Open Source Initiative's definitionThe Open Source Initiative defines the requirements and criteria for open standards as follows:[29] The RequirementAn "open standard" must not prohibit conforming implementations in open source software. The CriteriaTo comply with the Open Standards Requirement, an "open standard" must satisfy the following criteria. If an "open standard" does not meet these criteria, it will be discriminating against open source developers.
Ken Krechmer's definitionKen Krechmer[30] identifies ten "rights":
World Wide Web Consortium's definitionAs an important provider of Web technology ICT Standards, notably XML, http, HTML, CSS and WAI, the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) follows a process that promotes the development of high-quality standards.[31] Looking at the end result, the spec alone, up for adoption, is not enough. The participative/inclusive process leading to a particular design, and the supporting resources available with it should be accounted when we talk about Open Standards:
In August 2012, the W3C combined with the IETF and IEEE to launch OpenStand [13] 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". Digital Standards Organization definitionThe Digital Standards Organization (DIGISTAN) states that "an open standard must be aimed at creating unrestricted competition between vendors and unrestricted choice for users."[32] Its brief definition of "open standard" (or "free and open standard") is "a published specification that is immune to vendor capture at all stages in its life-cycle." Its more complete definition as follows:
This definition is based on the EU's EIF v1 definition of "open standard," but with changes to address what it terms as "vendor capture." They believe that "Many groups and individuals have provided definitions for 'open standard' that reflect their economic interests in the standards process. We see that the fundamental conflict is between vendors who seek to capture markets and raise costs, and the market at large, which seeks freedom and lower costs... Vendors work hard to turn open standards into franchise standards. They work to change the statutory language so they can cloak franchise standards in the sheep's clothing of 'open standard.' A robust definition of "free and open standard" must thus take into account the direct economic conflict between vendors and the market at large."[32] Free Software Foundation Europe's definitionThe Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) uses a definition which is based on the European Interoperability Framework v.1, and was extended after consultation with industry and community stakeholders. FSFE's standard has been adopted by groups such as the SELF EU Project, the 2008 Geneva Declaration on Standards and the Future of the Internet, and international Document Freedom Day teams. According to this definition an Open Standard is a format or protocol that is:
FFII's definitionThe Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure's definition is said{{by whom|date=September 2015}} to coincide with the definition issued in the European Interoperability Framework released in 2004.
UK government definitionThe UK government's definition of open standards applies to software interoperability, data and document formats. The criteria for open standards are published in the “[https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/open-standards-principles Open Standards Principles]” policy paper and are as follows.
Comparison of definitions
Examples of open standardsNote that because the various definitions of "open standard" differ in their requirements, the standards listed below may not be open by every definition. System
Hardware{{See also|Open-source hardware}}
File formats{{See also|Open format}}
Protocols
Programming languages
Other
Examples of associations
PatentsIn 2002 and 2003 the controversy about using reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) licensing for the use of patented technology in web standards increased. Bruce Perens, important associations as FSF or FFII and others have argued that the use of patents restricts who can implement a standard to those able or willing to pay for the use of the patented technology. The requirement to pay some small amount per user, is often an insurmountable problem for free/open source software implementations which can be redistributed by anyone. Royalty free (RF) licensing is generally the only possible license for free/open source software implementations. Version 3 of the GNU General Public License includes a section that enjoins anyone who distributes a program released under the GPL from enforcing patents on subsequent users of the software or derivative works. One result of this controversy was that many governments (including the Danish, French and Spanish governments singly and the EU collectively) specifically affirmed that "open standards" required royalty-free licenses. Some standards organizations, such as the W3C, modified their processes to essentially only permit royalty-free licensing. Patents for software, formulas and algorithms are currently enforceable in the US but not in the EU. The European Patent Convention Article 52 paragraph (2)(c) expressly prohibits algorithms, business methods and software from being covered by patents. The US has only allowed them since 1989 and there has been growing controversy in recent years as to either the benefit or feasibility. A standards body and its associated processes cannot force a patent holder to give up its right to charge license fees, especially if the company concerned is not a member of the standards body and unconstrained by any rules that were set during the standards development process. In fact, this element discourages some standards bodies from adopting an "open" approach, fearing that they will lose out if their members are more constrained than non-members. Few bodies will carry out (or require their members to carry out) a full patent search. Ultimately, the only sanctions a standards body can apply on a non-member when patent licensing is demanded is to cancel the standard, try to rework around it, or work to invalidate the patent. Standards bodies such as W3C and OASIS require{{Citation needed|date=June 2008}} that the use of required patents be granted under a royalty-free license as a condition for joining the body or a particular working group, and this is generally considered enforceable.{{Citation needed|date=June 2008}} Examples of patent claims brought against standards previously thought to be open include JPEG and the Rambus case over DDR SDRAM. The H.264 video codec is an example of a standards organization producing a standard that has known, non-royalty-free required patents. Often the scope of the standard itself determines how likely it is that a firm will be able to use a standard as patent-like protection. Richard Langlois argues that standards with a wide scope may offer a firm some level of protection from competitors but it is likely that Schumpeterian creative destruction will ultimately leave the firm open to being "invented around" regardless of the standard a firm may benefit from.[2] Quotes
See also
References1. ^{{cite web |first1=Henry William | last1= Chesbrough |first2= Wim | last2= Vanhaverbeke|first3= Joel | last3= West |title=Tim Simcoe: 'Chapter 8: Open Standards and Intellectual Property Rights' in Open Innovation: Researching A New Paradigm | publisher= Oxford University Press | url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232957368_Open_Innovation_Researching_A_New_Paradigm |year =2008|accessdate= April 25, 2017}} 2. ^1 Langlois, Richard N. "Technological Standards, Innovation, and Essential Facilities: Toward a Schmpeterian Post-Chicago Approach." (1999). 3. ^Greenstein, Shane, and Victor Sango, eds. Standards and Public Policy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2007. 4. ^Joel West as cited Greenstein, Shane, and Victor Sango, eds. Standards and Public Policy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2007. 5. ^Source: www.open-stand.org 6. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/othergroups/ipr-adhoc/openstandards.html|title=ITU-T|author=|date=|website=www.itu.int|accessdate=18 March 2018}} 7. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/ipr/|title=ITU-T|author=|date=|website=www.itu.int|accessdate=18 March 2018}} 8. ^{{cite web|url=http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink/fetch/2000/2122/3770791/customview.html?func=ll&objId=3770791&objAction=browse&sort=name|title=00. ISO standards and patents|author=|date=|website=isotc.iso.org|accessdate=18 March 2018}} 9. ^BCP 9: The Internet Standards Process 10. ^BCP 78: Rights Contributors Provide to the IETF Trust 11. ^BCP 79: Intellectual Property Rights in IETF Technology 12. ^IETF Trust Legal Provisions (page offers a FAQ for non-lawyers) 13. ^1 OpenStand: OpenStand: Principles for The Modern Standard Paradigm 14. ^European Interoperability Framework for pan-European eGovernment Services, Version 1.0 (2004) {{ISBN|92-894-8389-X}} page 9 15. ^{{citation |url=http://ec.europa.eu/idabc/servlets/Docd552.pdf?id=19529 |format=PDF |title=European Interoperability Framework for pan-European eGovernment Services |author=European Communities |year=2004 |accessdate=2016-02-09}} 16. ^[https://www.ncoic.org/home Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium], {{citation |url=http://wiki.ncoic.net/index.php?title=Open_Standards |title=NCOIC Lexicon}}, 2008 17. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.itst.dk/it-arkitektur-og-standarder/standardisering/Tekniske-standarder/arkiv/oio-kataloget-arkiv-version/Definition_of_open_standards.pdf|title="Definitions of Open Standards", 2004|author=|date=|website=itst.dk|accessdate=18 March 2018}} 18. ^{{cite web|url=https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000801164&dateTexte=&categorieLien=id|title="Loi nº 2004-575" for the Confidence in the Digital Economy," June 21, 2004|author=|date=|website=legifrance.gouv.fr|accessdate=18 March 2018}} 19. ^1 2 {{cite web|url=http://www.EstandaresAbiertos.org|title=Estándares abiertos e interoperabilidad. Foro sobre Estándares Abiertos.|author=|date=|website=www.estandaresabiertos.org|accessdate=18 March 2018}} 20. ^{{cite web|last1=Government of India|title=Policy on Open Standards for e-Governance|url=https://egovstandards.gov.in/sites/default/files/Published_Policy_Framework_Document/Policy%20on%20Open%20Standards%20for%20e-Governance.pdf|accessdate=25 July 2014|ref=india}} 21. ^{{cite web|title=Art. 68 CAD|url=http://www.normattiva.it/uri-res/N2Ls?urn:nir:stato:decreto.legislativo:2005-03-07;82!vig=|accessdate=25 July 2014}} 22. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2007/06/23/pdfs/A27150-27166.pdf|title="Ley 11/2007" of Public Electronic Access of the Citizens to the Public Services, June, 22nd 2007|author=|date=|website=boe.es|accessdate=18 March 2018}} 23. ^"Decreto 3390" of Free Software and Open Standards, December, 23rd 2004 24. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.dpsa.gov.za/documents/egov/MIOSVer4_1_2007.pdf|title="Government of South Africa, MIOS Version 4.1 2007"|author=|date=|website=dpsa.gov.za|accessdate=18 March 2018}} 25. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.e.govt.nz/standards/e-gif/e-gif-v-3-1/policy/e-gif-v-3-1-policy.pdf|title="New Zealand E-Government Interoperability Framework (e-GIF)" version 3.0, June, 22nd 2007|author=|date=|website=e.govt.nz|accessdate=18 March 2018}} 26. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/opendocument-open.html|title=Is OpenDocument an Open Standard? Yes!|author=|date=|website=www.dwheeler.com|accessdate=18 March 2018}} 27. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.efytimes.com/efytimes/fcreative.asp?edid=27036|title=OOXML: To Be, or Not To Be|author=|date=|website=efytimes.com|accessdate=18 March 2018}} 28. ^{{Citation |ssrn=1656616 |author1=Casson, Tony |author2=Ryan, Patrick S. |contribution=Open Standards, Open Source Adoption in the public sector, and their relationship to Microsoft’s market dominance |date=May 1, 2006 |title=Standards edge: unifier or divider? |editor=Sherrie Bolin |page=87 |publisher=Sheridan Books }} 29. ^{{cite web|url=http://opensource.org/osr|title=Open Standards Requirement for Software - Open Source Initiative|author=|date=|website=opensource.org|accessdate=18 March 2018}} 30. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.csrstds.com/openstds.html|title=The Meaning of Open Standards|author=|date=|website=www.csrstds.com|accessdate=18 March 2018}} 31. ^Definition of Open Standards World Wide Web Consortium 32. ^1 Defining "Open Standard" 33. ^What is an Open Standard? 34. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/|title=Architecture of the World Wide Web, Volume One|author=|date=|website=www.w3.org|accessdate=18 March 2018}} 35. ^{{cite web|url=http://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/index.html|title=Publicly Available Standards|author=|date=|website=standards.iso.org|accessdate=18 March 2018}} 36. ^https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/elibrary/case/complex-singularity-versus-openness 37. ^Portable Document File (PDF) format specification {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051022053754/http://www.pdf-x.com/pdfx_123_1.php |date=October 22, 2005 }} 38. ^{{cite web |title=ESO and partners launch innovative Data2Dome planetarium system |url=https://www.eso.org/public/announcements/ann17019/|website=www.eso.org|accessdate=27 April 2017}} 39. ^OpenReference Initiative: OpenReference frameworks, December 2016 40. ^{{cite web|url=http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/03/1374&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en|title=European Commission - PRESS RELEASES - Press release - World Standards Day, 14 October: Global standards for the Global Information Society|author=|date=|website=europa.eu|accessdate=18 March 2018}} 41. ^Nokia Foundation Award to Mårten Mickos 42. ^{{cite web|url=http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/FAQ.html|title=Frequently asked questions by the Press - Tim BL|author=|date=|website=www.w3.org|accessdate=18 March 2018}} 43. ^ {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090509190132/http://www.dst.gov.za/media-room/speeches/archived/speech.2007-05-23.2477659151 |date=May 9, 2009 }} Further reading
External links
3 : Open standards|Standards|Technological change |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
随便看 |
|
开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识,基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识,是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。