By Martin La Monica, 2 November 2005 09:15
NEWS Massachusetts state officials have criticised a decision to adopt OpenDocument as a standard, casting doubt over a closely watched initiative.
Marc Pacheco, the chairman of the Senate Committee on Post Audit and Oversight, on Monday held a hearing to probe into the process that led to a mandate to make OpenDocument the standard document format for all commonwealth agencies in the executive branch as of 2007.
The policy, finalised in September, was developed by the Information Technology Division, which is part of Massachusetts' Office of Administration and Finance.
The IT Division said OpenDocument-based products will improve interoperability between systems and ensure long-term archiving of official documents. The specification is developed at standards group OASIS (Organisation for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards).
There are commercial products that support or will support OpenDocument, including Sun Microsystems StarOffice, IBM's Workplace and the open-source product OpenOffice. But the IT Division's policy effectively shuts out Microsoft Office because the dominant supplier of productivity software does not support OpenDocument at this point.
During the hearing, Pacheco voiced a number of concerns regarding the IT Division's decision. He called into question the IT Division's authority in setting policy, saying the IT Division acted "unilaterally," and he expressed concern over the cost of walking away from Microsoft Office. He also contended that OpenDocument does not sufficiently address the needs of people with disabilities.
During questioning, the IT Division's chief information officer, Peter Quinn, and General Counsel Linda Hamel defended the decision, arguing that the move to OpenDocument would be in the commonwealth's best interest. Quinn said a standard, "open" format, rather than Microsoft's "proprietary XML" format, will ensure that electronic documents can be read hundreds of years from now.
Pacheco then called on Alan Cote, the state's supervisor of public records, as a witness. Secretary of State William Galvin has responsibility for public records.
Cote sharply criticised the IT department's decision, urging that its policy be rejected. He warned that a decision to go ahead with OpenDocument as a standard could result in the loss of electronic records.
"The rigid policy, such as the initiative before you that excludes any vendor or any process and relies on questionable, untested and unreliable practices or tools, does not suit the commonwealth well," Cote said in prepared remarks. "It may very well result in many electronic records being lost of destroyed."
Cote added that the company's records management system renders what format a document is saved in as moot.
In earlier comments, the IT Division counsel Hamel said the organisation has become the de facto archivist of electronic records for executive agencies, keeping track of data such as payroll.
"The problem of how to solve [records management] has fallen into the lap of the IT Division and the secretary of finance and administration," Hamel said.
One government official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said Cote's harsh rebuke of the policy reflected a turf war between Secretary of State Galvin and the Secretary of Administration and Finance Thomas Trimarco. With the rise of electronic archives over traditional records, "[Galvin's] power is being eroded," the official said.
Pacheco said Cote's remarks echo the concerns of many other high-ranking state politicians. "It verified what I've been hearing and my concerns, quite frankly," Pacheco said, adding that the IT Division has not operated in a "collaborative" fashion with other state agencies involved in setting IT policy.
He said he feared that the current situation has become a "stalemate" between the executive branch and legislature over how to set IT policy for the state.
Pacheco called on Quinn and Hamel to do a more thorough cost/benefit analysis and to submit a written analysis to explain the legal basis for the IT Division's policy.
Quinn said OpenDocument-based products do need to be improved to address people with disabilities. He noted that IBM and Sun in the coming weeks intend to launch an effort within OASIS to improve the standard in regards to accessibility.
Martin LaMonica writes for CNET News.com.
Comments
There are 5 comments. Join the discussion
1. anonymous
So who is in MS' pocket then?
The arguments against OpenDocument/OASIS are pretty poor.
How is moving to OpenDocument going to make the data disappear? If they have a reason would the same not apply to the MS format?
It sounds like a clash of egos and they should listen to the people who have to deal with the actual problems, i.e the IT Department.
2. anonymous
So it appears Microsoft's influence extends into the government. That's a little scary. Is it's new motto "Microsoft - controlling the world, quietly" ?
3. Charles Smith
I have downloaded and tried OpenOffice
Version 2.0. It works extremely well and provides the functionality required by office workers and executives.
Cost = Zero.
Any manager responsible for IT Desktop software who does not at least download and try this software is being negligent.
The situation currently with Microsoft is very much like IBM in the 1970's where FUD and inertia left users with expensive and proprietory solutions.
4. anonymous
The article by David Wheeler at http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20051029212458555
goes a long way to dispelling much of the FUD surrounding this story.
It seems that MS is only excluded because they choose not to support the open document format. That is their choice and they may have good business reasons for this, but Massachusetts also has the right to choose not to use a product that does not support an open data format.
5. Graham Coles
How can you lose the documents?
I thought that pdf was also acceptable as a format, in which case just export them.
Of course, as Microsoft have refused to add 'save as pdf' so far, they will probably have to use something like Acrobat, but this doesn’t sound beyond the realms of possibility to me ...