text:
FOSS Government Policy/Strategic Importance of FOSS

Many countries are contemplating the promotion of FOSS via legislative, policy or government procurement methods If FOSS were just another method of developing software, governments would have little reason to specifically advocate FOSS. However, FOSS brings many compelling benefits to a nation, especially a developing nation with limited resources.

Various governments have different motives for their FOSS initiatives. Since each country’s circumstances are different, there is a wide variance between their motives. Nor are these reasons, necessarily, similar to the often-cited reasons for private sector adoption of FOSS. FOSS brings additional benefits that are not relevant to the private sector but critical to developing nations.

The most common motives are:

Strategic Benefits
 * Developing local capacity/industry
 * Reducing imports/conserving foreign exchange
 * Enhancing national security
 * Reducing copyright infringements
 * Enabling Localization

Economic Benefits
 * Increasing competition
 * Reducing Total Cost of Ownership
 * Enhancing Security
 * Achieving vendor independence

Social Benefits
 * Increasing access to information

Developing Local Capacity/Industry
Developing local capacity falls into two main categories: the capacity to use and the capacity to develop software. Although interrelated, FOSS assists in their development in different ways.

Using Software
The local capacity to utilize ICTs is traditionally held back by the high cost of both hardware and software. The ability to participate in the information society and build local knowledge communities is severely constrained when the cost of a basic operating system is equivalent to several years’ wages for the average citizen FOSS alleviates this situation (though it can never totally eliminate it) in two ways: zero licensing cost and free redistribution. It is possible to obtain FOSS for almost any conceivable purpose without any licensing costs, thus reducing the cost barrier. FOSS is also freely redistributable, meaning that anyone can share software with a neighbour in need. Free (the F in FOSS) Software, in particular, holds this as one of its fundamental principles. Traditional proprietary software, no matter how low the costs, often cannot be freely redistributed in this manner.

Developing Software
A common problem faced by developing nations is the lack of development capacity. Where does a country obtain the human capacity required to sustain an ICT infrastructure? In this area, FOSS excels. For most developing countries, it is not that FOSS will make a non-existent industry more competitive but, rather, it allows a developing nation to kick-start its ICT industry and advance to a stage where it can begin to fully utilize the benefits of ICT internally.

It has been noted that there is a positive correlation between the growth of a FOSS developer base and the innovative software capacities of an economy. A report from the International Institute of Infonomics lists three reasons for this.

 * Low barriers to entry
 * FOSS, which encourages free modification and redistribution, is easy to obtain, use and learn from. Proprietary software tends to be much more restrictive, not just in the limited availability of source code but also because of licensing, patent and copyright limitations. FOSS allows developers to build on existing knowledge and pre-built components, much like basic research. On the other hand, existing proprietary software is often the result of years of building and refinement that a software company in a developing country has little chance of developing a competitive system and selling it.

 * FOSS as an excellent training system
 * The open and collaborative nature of FOSS allows a student or software engineer to examine and experiment with software concepts at virtually no direct cost to society. Apart from the source code and software tools that FOSS provides, there are many technical manuals, guides and ‘how-tos’ provided in every FOSS distribution. This documentation is the equivalent of thousands of dollars of manuals and textbooks, all available and freely redistributable. A student can also tap into the global collaborative FOSS development network that includes massive archives of technical information and interactive discussion tools. Proprietary systems are usually closed and do not encourage this experimentation and learning.

 * FOSS as a source of standards
 * FOSS often becomes a de facto standard by virtue of its dominance in a particular sector of an industry. By being involved in setting the standards in a particular FOSS application, a region can ensure that the standard produced takes into account regional needs and cultural considerations. For instance, proper word wrapping is still an issue with many non-roman alphabetical languages and holds back the development of word processors, browsers, databases and other software tools for these languages. However, the Chinese language, although based on a radically different system from that of western languages, is decently supported in FOSS systems due to the involvement of Chinese-speaking FOSS developers.

Additionally, the current business models structured around FOSS are primarily based on services, rather than on products. This makes it much more likely that a FOSS based company will have the majority of its staff in the country that it sells to and will thus reinvest its profits there.

Reducing Imports/Conserving Foreign Exchange
A significant portion of the global proprietary software industry today is centralized in only a small number of countries. Companies based in the United States produce an enormous proportion of the world’s operating systems (IBM AIX, HP-UX, Solaris, Microsoft Windows, etc) and business applications (Oracle, PeopleSoft, Adobe Photoshop, etc). Countries that have to license this software, other than the originating country, end up importing software licenses. The large cost of these licenses places an enormous burden on the financial resources of a developing nation, resources that can be used on other development needs. Fortunately, alternatives exist.

FOSS, by the nature of its licensing terms, can be obtained at little or no cost, and therefore, saves a massive amount of foreign exchange. But this is not the only benefit. As noted in the European study, “Free/Libre and Open Source Software: Survey and Study”:

 * The costs of this more service-oriented model of open source are then also normally spent within the economy of the governmental organization, and not necessary (sic) to large multinational companies. This has a positive feedback regarding employment, local investment base, tax revenue, etc.

Whatever money is spent on FOSS in a country usually stays in that country, which leads to the previously mentioned benefit – the development of local industry.

This is reportedly one of the major motivations behind Brazil's FOSS policy. In its 2002 balance of payments report, Brazil actually spent more money on “royalties and licenses” than it did on “computer and information”.

While software licenses only represent a portion of royalties and licenses, any reduction in licensing fees would improve Brazil's balance of payment situation. It has been argued that the current balance of payment situation has negatively impacted Brazil's economic development.

Other countries or economies that are reported to have similar motives include South Africa, Taiwan (province of China) and South Korea.

Enhancing National Security
Proprietary software is normally distributed in binary format; therefore it is difficult to reverse-engineer and to understand exactly what a program does. Although the opaqueness of the binary format offers limited protection to the intellectual property of the software maker, it engenders mistrust and suspicion. Could there be hidden back-doors or holes in the software, possibly allowing a remote attacker to easily compromise data? In the case of governments other than the United States of America, there is some mistrust of Microsoft’s software, especially after the infamous “NSA Key” incident.

Other recent cases include the acknowledgments by both Netgear and Cisco systems that there were secret user names and passwords hard-coded into certain models of their wireless routers. The user could not be disabled, allowing anyone with the right username/password combination to connect and take full control of the router. Both Cisco and Netgear later issued a fix but there is no way to verify that other back-doors do not exist.

There have been previous cases where vendors “fixed” such a vulnerability by merely changing the username/password combination and hoping that no one would find out about the new combination.

Mistrust of “black-boxed” foreign software that cannot be audited has been cited as one of China’s reasons for its adoption of FOSS and one of the reasons why other governments are considering FOSS.

Reducing Copyright Infringements
Copyright infringements in the form of unauthorized duplication of software (often called software piracy) are a problem in almost every country around the world. The Business Software Alliance estimates that unauthorized software copying in 2002 alone costed US$13.08 billion. Even in developed nations where software is affordable in theory, software copyright infringement rates were as high as 24 percent in the United States and 35 percent in Europe. The rates in developing countries, where lower incomes make software far more expensive, are upwards of 90 percent.

Copyright infringement and lax laws can and often do hurt a country in many ways. A country with a poor track record in copyright protection is not as attractive to foreign investors. Membership in the World Trade Organization (WTO) and access to its benefits are strongly influenced by the level of protection given to copyrights and patents in a country. Bilateral and multilateral trading agreements with developed nations often involve requirements to reduce copyright infringements as well. A culture of copyright infringement hurts local software development, as there is less incentive for local software developers to create a local product.

Copyright infringement issues have been cited as a major motivator for Viet Nam’s FOSS policy. A trade agreement with the United States signed in 2001 and Viet Nam's goal of joining the WTO by 2005 make it imperative that the copyright infringements in that country be greatly reduced.

Enabling Localization
Countries where English is not commonly spoken can be at a serious disadvantage when it comes to the uptake and dissemination of ICTs. If the country and language are not deemed to be commercially important, proprietary software makers may not choose to produce a localized version of their software, thereby increasing the barriers to ICT usage.

Localization is one of the areas where FOSS becomes a preferred option because of its open nature. Users are able to modify FOSS to suit the unique requirements of a particular cultural region, regardless of economic size. All that is needed is a number of individuals possessing the technical capability to create a minimally localized version of any FOSS. While the construction of a completely localized software platform is no small feat, it is at least possible. Microsoft’s decision in 1998 against producing an Icelandic version of Windows 98 would have made computing in Iceland’s national language almost impossible if it were not for the emergence of FOSS alternatives.

Few countries cite localization as a motivating factor but localization efforts exist in most non-English speaking countries throughout the Asia-Pacific region.

Increasing Competition
The software industry often has high barriers to entry, especially in mature software markets. Modern software applications have taken hundreds, if not thousands, of human years to research and develop. This is an investment that no fledging software company can afford. Yet, once built, the marginal costs of producing additional units of software are miniscule. This grants significant first-mover advantages to initial market entrants and keeps competitors from entering the market at later stages, effectively limiting competition in the market to a few large, established organizations.

FOSS breaks down the barriers to entry by providing to software companies a feature-rich, high-quality base of software to build on. When utilizing FOSS, software companies compete on the services and additional innovations that they add to the existing FOSS base, rather than reaping financial benefits from research and development performed many years ago. Depending on the FOSS license and corporate business model, these benefits often find their way back into the FOSS base, resulting in a larger base of software for new entrants to build on. New entrants into the software industry do not need to spend decades reinventing existing software. Instead, they are free to focus on innovations and the additional functionality that the market demands.

There is significant evidence that FOSS is bringing new competition into markets that have traditionally been dominated by monopolies. Analysts have predicted that competition from FOSS will significantly challenge Microsoft’s (dominant on desktop computers and office productivity software) profit margins. Microsoft has also been forced to give significant discounts to stay competitive where companies, organizations and governments have been aware of the availability of FOSS competitors.

Reducing Total Cost of Ownership
FOSS applications save money in several ways. The most obvious is through the lack of licensing fees, since FOSS can be freely redistributed without licensing fees. However, FOSS also lowers costs through means that can be much harder to quantify, such as better security, ease of administration, cross-platform availability, and others.

While the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) debate still rages between the advocates of FOSS and proprietary software (mostly Microsoft), many organizations have reported significant cost savings from their own implementations of FOSS. Intel reportedly saved US$200 million from a move to GNU/Linux from Unix, and Amazon reported a savings of US$17 million from switching their servers to GNU/Linux. Major financial institutions such as Credit Suisse First Boston, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs and Charles Schwab are moving a significant portion of their infrastructure to FOSS systems to reap these cost savings.

There are only a limited number of TCO studies showing the total cost of running FOSS systems versus proprietary systems. These studies analyze multiple cost factors other than software licensing costs, including maintenance, personnel and opportunity costs from service disruptions. Several have been very positive towards FOSS:

 * A TCO study performed by the Robert Frances Group showed that GNU/Linux costs roughly 40 percent of Microsoft Windows and as low as 14 percent of Sun Microsystem’s Solaris.
 * NetProject reported that the TCO of GNU/Linux was 35 percent of Microsoft Window’s TCO. Even more interesting was that the saving was due not just to licensing costs but also various other costs, including reduction in the number of support staff and software updates that results from using GNU/Linux.
 * Gartner reported that using GNU/Linux in a “locked” configuration resulted in a roughly 15 percent lower TCO compared to Windows XP.

Merrill Lynch, a major financial management company, recently reported that using GNU/Linux could reduce costs dramatically. Surprisingly, their TCO study revealed that the largest cost saving was not from software licensing costs but from personnel and hardware costs.

Government institutions that have reported significant cost savings to date have been few and mostly in relatively developed countries. For example, the city of Largo in the United States has reported savings of over US$1 million a year, with the city running its IT infrastructure on a budget that is only 40 percent the size of comparable cities. The Government of Sweden has identified savings of US$1 billion a year while the Government of Denmark has identified savings of between US$480 million to US$730 million.

Enhancing Security
There is no such thing as a perfectly secure operating system or platform. However, factors such as development method, program architecture and target market can greatly affect the security of a system and consequently make it easier or more difficult to breach. The following studies indicate that FOSS systems are superior to proprietary systems in this respect:

 * A study found that FOSS applications fixed problems faster than their proprietary counterparts. The contrast is much more apparent when the application is extensively used by the FOSS developer.
 * A comparative study of FOSS code and proprietary equivalents found that FOSS had lower defect densities. The FOSS database MySQL had one sixth of the defects found in proprietary equivalents. The study was conducted by Reasoning, a company that produces automated software inspection and auditing tools.
 * “Hacker Insurance” issued by J.S. Wurzler Underwriting Managers costs five to 15 percent more if Windows is used instead of GNU/Linux or Unix systems. Walter Kopf, senior vice president of underwriting at J.S. Wurzler Underwriting Managers, says, “We have found out that the possibility for loss is greater using the NT system.”

FOSS distributions usually include a wide variety of security tools that allow a competent system administrator to scan their own network for vulnerabilities, detect outside attacks, and protect internal systems. In some cases, FOSS tools prove to be far superior to their proprietary counterparts.

The security aspects have already encouraged many public organizations to switch or to consider switching to FOSS solutions. The French Customs and Indirect Taxation authority migrated to Red Hat Linux largely because of security concerns. China, Japan and South Korea also cite security as a major driving force in their FOSS initiatives.

Achieving Vendor Independence
Many organizations are finding that they are tied to their existing software vendors. Due to intentionally incompatible data formats, large investments in legacy systems and patent restrictions, switching to a different supplier can often be a costly and lengthy undertaking. These organizations are then almost held hostage by their software vendor, forced into purchasing bundled systems that they do not need or upgrading when there is no need to do so.

The authors of the paper “Free/Libre and Open Source Software: Survey and Study” produced by the International Institute of Infonomics in the Netherlands argue against use of proprietary software in government. They say:

 * ...Consequently one major argument against the implementation of proprietary software in the public sector is the subsequent dependency on proprietary software vendors. Whenever, the proprietary standards are established the necessity to follow them is given. Even in an open tender acquisition system, this requirement for compatibility with proprietary standards makes the system biased towards specific software vendors, perpetuating a dependency.

Vendors who use FOSS systems have a much harder time locking in their clients. Most FOSS systems use open, documented standards. Even when this is not the case, the availability of the code makes it far easier to reverse-engineer any data format or standard. Purchasers of FOSS systems are not bound to stay with their supplier. They can easily engage another company to develop the systems or build an internal team of technical staff.

Using FOSS systems as a means of gaining vendor independence has been raised in several areas. A report to the UK Government concludes that “the existence of an OSS reference implementation of a data standard has often accelerated the adoption of such standards, and recommends that the Government consider selective sponsorship of OSS reference implementations”. The UK health system became aware of the dangers of vendor dependency when the insolvency of a major supplier forced it to migrate systems to a FOSS platform.

 * Source: http://www.ogc.gov.uk/embedded_object.asp?docid=2498

Other countries or economies that have cited vendor independence as a driver for their FOSS initiatives include the Taiwan Province of China, the German city of Munich, the Australian state of New South Wales, Brazil and South Africa.

Increasing Access to Information
Although the social value of FOSS is not highlighted by proponents from public and private sectors, it can be a passionate issue among the many advocates from civil society.

Software, especially FOSS, represents knowledge – the rules, procedures and methods of manipulating data. In today’s knowledge society, knowledge drives not only productivity and economies but also shapes the future. Many experts and opinion leaders advocate that knowledge should be shared as widely and as freely as possible. Steve Weber argues:

 * A regime built around the free diffusion of tools has an interesting characteristic: the degree to which a software tool can be utilized and expanded becomes limited only by the knowledge, learning, and innovative energy of the potential users; not by exclusionary property rights, prices, or the power of countries and corporations.

In the process of considering the most commonly reported benefits of FOSS, it is best to keep in mind that its subtle social values (derived in part from the unfettered sharing of knowledge) are often ignored.


text:
Adventist Youth Honors Answer Book/Quilt/Types

Block Quilts
Block quilts are made by piecing rectangular (usually square) blocks of cloth together. This forms a regular pattern. The blocks may be decorated with fabric paint, appliqués, or other methods. They can be made from cloth with a single solid color or from prints.

Crazy Quilts
This art form was developed in United States during the 1880's when it created quite a stir. Crazy quilting does not actually refer to a specific kind of quilting (the needlework which binds two or more layers of fabric together), but a specific kind of patchwork. Crazy quilts rarely have the internal layer of batting that is part of what defines quilting as a textile technique.

Regular patchwork combines the pieces of fabric into a predetermined and regular design, but crazy patchwork uses irregular pieces of fabric on a foundation fabric or paper. This may create haphazard-looking and asymmetrical designs, or the designer may use some control in placement. The patches and seams are then usually heavily embellished.

Medallion Quilts
A medallion quilt starts with a center motif and is then surrounded by multiple boarders. The center is often a large square or star.

Pictorial Quilts
Pictorial Quilts are planned much like a painting. The artist would plan the colors and patterns of each part or item represented in the "picture" before beginning. Each piece would be cut carefully and then be stitched onto the quilt top to form the picture. Great care must be taken in piecing items in order (for example: for a nature scene, items in the foreground of the picture should be stitched on last.

|

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Introduction to Psychology/Criticisms of Psychology

=Criticisms of Psychology=

Psychology as normative
One question that arises in the study of abnormal psychology is the question "what is a disorder?" In medicine, it may be more obvious when a person has a disease. But when studying the depths of the human mind, who gets to draw the line between what is a disease and what is not? And who has the authority to decide who is "stupid" and who is not?

Controversy as a science
Although modern psychology attempts to be a scientific endeavour, the field has a history of controversy. Some criticisms of psychology have been made on ethical and philosophical grounds. Some have argued that by subjecting the human mind to experimentation and statistical study, psychologists objectify persons. Because it treats human beings as things, as objects that can be examined by experiment, psychology is sometimes portrayed as dehumanizing, ignoring or downplaying what is most essential about being human. This criticism has come from within the field as well, particularly by existential and humanistic psychologists.

A common criticism of psychology concerns its fuzziness as a science. Philosopher Thomas Kuhn suggested in 1962 that psychology is in a pre-paradigmatic state, lacking the agreement on facts found in mature sciences such as chemistry and physics. Because some areas of psychology rely on "soft" research methods such as surveys and questionnaires, critics have claimed that psychology is not as scientific as psychologists assume. Methods such as introspection and psychoanalysis, used by some psychologists, are inherently subjective. Objectivity, validity, and rigour are key attributes in science, and some approaches to psychology have fallen short on these criteria. On the other hand, greater use of statistical controls and increasingly sophisticated research design, analysis, and statistical methods, as well as a decline (at least within academic psychology departments) in the use of less scientific methods, have lessened the impact of this criticism to some degree.

Debates continue, however, such as the questioned effectiveness of probability testing as a valid research tool. The concern is that this statistical method may promote trivial findings as meaningful, especially when large samples are used.[5] Psychologists have responded with an increased use of effect size statistics, rather than sole reliance on the traditional p<.05 decision rule.

Research-practitioner gap
There is also concern from researchers about a perceived scientific gap between empirically based practices. Exponents of evidence-based approaches to psychological practice say that "over the past several decades, the fields of clinical psychology, psychiatry, and social work have borne witness to a widening and deeply troubling gap between science and practice" and "less and less of what researchers do finds its way into the consulting room, and less and less of what practitioners do derives from scientific evidence." Moreover there are many "unvalidated and sometimes harmful psychotherapeutic methods" that have been widely adopted by the profession. However, "the fields of clinical psychology, psychiatry, and social work have recently placed increased emphasis on evidence-based mental health practices."


text:
XForms/Controlling Button Appearance

This example demonstrates how to control the button appearance using labels, hint text and images. To see the button images appear you will need to create a file called XForms-button.jpg in the folder that this program is executed from.

This example requires an image to be used in the program.

This image can be downloaded from here:.

Program
   Test of Trigger Appearances A simple model button that brings up a message in a window:  Simple Button Button clicked  A model button that also displays "hint text" when you hover over the button:

 Button With Hint Text On Hover Button clicked This is the hint text. </xf:trigger>

A button that includes an image and hint text:

<xf:trigger appearance="xf:image">  <xf:message level="modal" ev:event="DOMActivate">Image clicked</xf:message> <xf:hint>This hint text comes up if you hover over a button.</xf:hint> </xf:trigger>

A button that includes text, and image and text:

<xf:trigger appearance="xf:image"> <xf:label>Text before the image...  ...text after the image.</xf:label> <xf:message level="modal" ref="message" ev:event="DOMActivate" /> <xf:hint>Hints work with labels and images.</xf:hint> </xf:trigger>

A trigger that extracts the label, hint and message text from the model:

<xf:trigger> <xf:label ref="label" /> <xf:message level="modal" ref="message" ev:event="DOMActivate" /> <xf:hint ref="hint" /> </xf:trigger>

Discussion
The XForm specification also uses the xf:help tag. to allow for context sensitive help. This tag would work just like the hint tag but would be activated by the browser or systems help function. You can use a style sheet to also use the help tag.

title: XForms/Controlling Button Appearance


text:
Talk:XForms

We are looking for great XForms examples. Please fee free to add your own examples.

Just and a line to the table of contents that looks like the following:

 * 1) /My Example Name/

Make SURE to put the double square brackes and a slash before and after the example name. Just save, and click on the link and put your code inside the tags. We would also like to see a screen image and a discussion of your program.

Thanks for your contributions! --Dmccreary 17:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup-NC
I know it is a mistake easily done as so many programming books use the old and now obsolete "Namespace" naming convetion. Still the Book was started 5. September 2006 and therefore must follow the Naming policy.

--Krischik T 06:09, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

 * OK. I will move the book.  I was just following the examples and the link that you pointed me to did NOT explicitily state ANYTHING about not using namespaces in the book name.

--Dmccreary 11:51, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Namespaces are seperated from the main text with a ':' - Like "Talk:", "User:", "Template:", Wikibooks: etc. pp. The confusion comes because ':' is also allowed inside a pagename. So "Programming:XForms" looks like the book "XForms" inside the namespace "Programming" but is isn't. Most real namespaces are used organisatoric pages and "Cookbook" is the only bookshelf which got real namespace. With the Naming policy we finealy disallowed the namespace look alikes for books or bookshelfs. Real namespaces are still allowed - but you have to apply for one and there are only 255 available.

 * Are there any tools to move an entire book?

 * There are some bots which can help but I never used them. We moved 200 page [Ada Programming]] by hand and then run the "redirect fix bot.". As in Staff lounge for bot use.

Printable version
If anyone wants to create a printable version of this book, the instructions are here: Help:Print_versions. Feel free to do so but note that the Table of Contents is still being updated so the print version will have to stay in sync. Once we get to our first 100 example programs I think that might be a good cut-over point. --Dmccreary 15:17, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

 * I started to create a pritable version. It is XForms/Print version.  It is not finished and would require maintenance for each time I redo a chapter.  I hope to create a script that updates the printable verion in the future.  Perhaps and XForm app?

Examples Wanted : Another Example added
Hey, I added another example wanted in the examples wanted section. I personally have a few questions in that area and if anyone knows how to do it please tell me here.

Translation in French
I am beginning a French translation. --Dom 20:06, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Best guide for XFORM
http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/1499051 ?? This does not seem to be a guide to xForms? --Logomachist (talk) 17:44, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

and for debugging the xform anyone can use http://xformsinstitute.com/validator/

Its make my life easier in xform and more design independent, i can do more programing not working what designer do.

Xform is best i am waiting when will IE support it.

Or anyone know where to fine patch for IE get supported.

Could someone add info/examples on actions and events?
I would request explanations of actions and events. Is it possible to have a conditional binding (where the binding is only in effect if some condition is true)? I'm having trouble finding this information elsewhere.

Removed Dead Link
The following link is a 404 - it was located on the main title page. So I removed it: wasn't sure if it should be replaced by a new link, so hence made this note in case somebody knows.

Google Code Version Control System

Wik314159 (discuss • contribs) 17:34, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:XForms


text:
XForms/Selecting a Date

Motivation
Users frequently want to select a date rather than have to type the date into a field. They often want to select a date such as "next Tuesday", but they might have to use a calendar to look up the day that Tuesday falls on.

Luckily a calendar selector is built in to most XForms implementations.

Screen Image
If you have a field that is "bound" to a date type the form will appear as follows:

Link to Working XForms Application
Date Selector

Sample Program
Here is an example that uses the date picker:

   Example of using the date selector by binding an instance to an XML Schema date type:

 Enter a date:

Testing
A small calendar icon should appear directly to the right of the input field. Click on the calendar icon and select a date. Note that you can change the day and the month using the calendar picker.

Discussion
The key line is: Note that if you do not use the bind command, the input will work like an ordinary text field.

The format that is put into the date field is YYYY-MM-DD which is the format used in XML for dates. You can use other formats such as MM-DD-YYYY but you will have to use an XPath expression to format the appearance of the field and make the appearance separate from the value in the model.

Once bound to type "xs:date", an empty string(date not set) will not allow the form to submit, there is no known direct solution, however using custom binding this can be overcome

example:

css:

title: XForms/Selecting a Date


text:
XForms/Formatting a date

Motivation
XML stores dates in the format YYYY-MM-DD such as 2007-08-30. Unfortunately this is usually not the way users want to view their dates.

This example XForms program uses CSS to hide an input date and an XPath expression to get the date to display in the MM/DD/YYYY format typically used in the US.

Screen Image

Link to XForm Example
Link to Date Format External Example

Discussion
The CSS style sheet hides the input field. The input has the class="hidden" attribute.

The output is formatted using the following XPath expression: concat(  substring(/MyModel/MyDate,6,2),   '/',   substring(/MyModel/MyDate,9,2),   '/',   substring(/MyModel/MyDate,1,4) )

Concat is the XPath concatenation operator. The input is in the format: "YYYY-MM-DD". We just need to reach in and get the correct characters out.
 * 1) The first substring goes to the 6th character and pulls out the two month (MM) characters.
 * 2) The second substring starts at the 9th character and gets two day (DD) characters.
 * 3) The last substring returns characters 1-4 which are the four year characters (YYYY).

You do not have to display all four letters in the year. By changing the last substring from:

substring(/MyModel/MyDate,1,4) to be substring(/MyModel/MyDate,3,4)

You will only get the last two digits of the year.

title: XForms/Formatting a date


text:
FOSS A General Introduction/Introduction

What is Free/Open Source Software?
David Wheeler:

Briefly, OSS/FS programs are programs whose licenses give users the freedom to run the program for any purpose, to study and modify the program, and to redistribute copies of either the original or modified program (without having to pay royalties to previous developers).

Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) has become an international phenomenon, moving from relative obscurity to being the latest buzzword in a few short years. However, there is still a lack of understanding about what really constitutes FOSS and the ramifications of this new concept. To better explain this phenomenon, we will examine the philosophy and development methods behind FOSS.

The FOSS philosophy
There are two major philosophies in the FOSS world: the Free Software Foundation (FSF) philosophy and the Open Source Initiative (OSI) philosophy. We begin with the FSF philosophy, due to its historical precedence (see the following section, “A Brief History of FOSS”) and pioneering position in the movement.

According to the FSF, free software is about protecting four user freedoms:
 * The freedom to run a program, for any purpose;
 * The freedom to study how a program works and adapt it to a person’s needs. Access to the source code is a precondition for this;
 * The freedom to redistribute copies so that you can help your neighbour; and
 * The freedom to improve a program and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

At the heart of FSF is the freedom to cooperate. Because non-free (free as in freedom, not price) software restricts the freedom to cooperate, FSF considers non-free software unethical. FSF is also opposed to software patents and additional restrictions to existing copyright laws. All of these restrict the four user freedoms listed above. For a more detailed explanation of why software needs to be free, please refer to the FSF explanation, “Why Software Should Be Free”, found at http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/shouldbefree.html

The OSI philosophy is somewhat different: The basic idea behind open source is very simple: When programmers can read, redistribute, and modify the source code for a piece of software, the software evolves. People improve it, people adapt it, people fix bugs. And this can happen at a speed that, if one is used to the slow pace of conventional software development, seems astonishing.

The OSI is focused on the technical values of making powerful, reliable software, and is more business-friendly than the FSF. It is less focused on the moral issues of Free Software and more on the practical advantages of the FOSS distributed development method.

While the fundamental philosophy of the two movements are different, both FSF and OSI share the same space and cooperate on practical grounds like software development, efforts against proprietary software, software patents, and the like. As Richard Stallman says, the Free Software Movement and the Open Source Movement are two political parties in the same community.

The FOSS development method
The FOSS development model is unique and became possible only with the advent of the Internet and the communication boom caused by it. The cathedral and bazaar analogies are used to contrast the FOSS development model with traditional software development methods.

Traditional software development is likened to the way cathedrals were built in ancient times. Small groups of skilled artisans carefully planned out the design in isolation and everything was built in a single effort. Once built, the cathedrals were complete and little further modification was made. Software was traditionally built in a similar fashion. Groups of programmers worked in isolation, with careful planning and management, until their work was completed and the program released to the world. Once released, the program was considered finished and limited work was subsequently done on it.

In contrast, FOSS development is more akin to a bazaar, which grows organically. Initial traders come, establish their structures, and begin business. Later traders come and establish their own structures, and the bazaar grows in what appears to be a very chaotic fashion. Traders are concerned primarily with building a minimally functional structure so that they can begin trading. Later additions are added as circumstances dictate. Likewise, FOSS development starts off highly unstructured. Developers release early minimally functional code to the general public and then modify their programs based on feedback. Other developers may come along and modify or build upon the existing code. Over time, an entire operating system and suite of applications develops and evolves continuously.

The bazaar method of development has been proven over time to have several advantages:

 * Reduced duplication of effort
 * By releasing programs early and granting users the right to modify and redistribute the source code, FOSS developers reuse the work produced by compatriots. The economies of scale can be enormous. Instead of five software developers in 10 companies writing a single networking application, there is the potential for the combined efforts of 50 developers. The reduced duplication of effort allows FOSS development to scale to massive, unheard of levels involving thousands of developers around the world.

 * Building upon the work of others
 * With the availability of existing source code to build on, development times are reduced. Many FOSS projects rely on software built by other projects to supply needed functionality. For example, instead of writing their own cryptographic code, the Apache web server project uses the OpenSSL project’s implementation, thereby saving thousands of hours of coding and testing. Even in cases where source code cannot be directly integrated, the availability of existing source code allows developers to learn how another project has solved a similar problem.

 * Better quality control :"Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow” is an oft-cited quotation in the FOSS world. It means with enough qualified developers using the application and examining the source code, errors are spotted and fixed faster. Proprietary applications may accept error reports but because their users are denied access to the source code, users are limited to reporting symptoms. FOSS developers often find that users with access to the source code not only report problems but also pinpoint the exact cause and, in some cases, supply the fixes. This greatly reduces development and quality control time.
 * Reduced maintenance costs
 * Maintenance of any software package can often equal or exceed the cost of initial software development. When a single organization has to maintain software, this can be an extremely expensive task. However, with the FOSS development model, maintenance costs can be shared among the thousands of potential users of a software application, reducing per-organization costs. Likewise, enhancements can be made by the organization/individual with the best expertise in the matter, which results in a more efficient use of resources.

What is the history of FOSS?
A Brief History of Free/Open Source Software Movement:

The free/open source software movement began in the "hacker" culture of U.S. computer science laboratories (Stanford, Berkeley, Carnegie Mellon, and MIT) in the 1960's and 1970's.

''The community of programmers was small, and close-knit. Code passed back and forth between the members of the community--if you made an improvement you were expected to submit your code to the community of developers. To withhold code was considered gauché--after all, you benefited from the work of your friends, you should return the favor.''

A Brief History of Free/Open Source Software Movement
The FOSS movement dates back to almost the very beginning of the computer industry, although it was not then formally defined or conceptualized. It was only in the late 1970s and early 1980s that the sharing of software began to really come in conflict with proprietary software. One of the earlier references to proprietary software was made by William H. Gates III in his now-famous “An Open Letter to Hobbyists. In this letter, dated 3 February 1976, he rails against the prevailing culture of software sharing:

''Why is this? As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, most of you steal your software. Hardware must be paid for, but software is something to share. Who cares if the people who worked on it get paid?''

Proprietary software would gain momentum over the years. At the pioneering MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab in the early 1980s, a company called Symbolics was formed and took what was freely available code (the LISP programming language) and made it proprietary. In the process, it wiped out the software-sharing culture of the MIT lab at the time. This destruction, however, would eventually result in the creation of the FSF and the FOSS culture today.

Richard Stallman, one of the MIT lab members at the time, was appalled at the turn of events. It would shape his view of proprietary software and instill in him the resolve to create a free operating system. The GNU (recursive acronym for GNU is Not Unix) project was born in January 1984 and over the next decade, it created a variety of critical tools that formed a portion of the operating system. The FSF was created a year later to promote Free Software and the GNU project. However, up until 1991, the GNU project had yet to produce a totally free software system due to a missing critical piece: the kernel.

The kernel is the heart of the operating system. In 1991, Linus Torvalds, who at the time was a second year graduate student at the University of Helsinki, wrote and distributed a Unix-like kernel. In the manner of FOSS development, it was distributed widely, improved upon and soon adapted to become the core of the GNU/Linux operating system.

There were other FOSS projects in progress at the time, including BIND, Perl and the BSD operating systems. All of these projects eventually ended up merging or cross-pollinating.

The GNU/Linux operating system would continue to grow steadily in features and capabilities. In 1997 Linux exploded into the press limelight, with International Data Corp (IDC) noting that GNU/Linux already owned 25 percent of the server market and was growing at an annual compound growth rate of 25 percent.

In 1998, in response to Netscape’s release of its Netscape Navigator code as FOSS, a group of FOSS developers came together and the label “Open Source” was created. This led to the formation of the Open Source Initiative and the Open Source Definition. The primary purpose of this initiative was to get the corporate world to pay attention to the FOSS development process and steer a path away from the “confrontational” attitude of the Free Software movement.

In 1999, the massively successful IPO of GNU/Linux distributor Red Hat gave it a market capitalization of US$4.8 billion. Other successful IPOs that year were VA Linux (US$7 billion), Cobalt Networks ($3.1 billion) and Andover.net ($712 million). As the poster child of FOSS, GNU/Linux's success meant that FOSS had truly arrived.


text:
FOSS A General Introduction/Why FOSS?

Andrew Leonard, “An Alternative Voice: How the Tech-Poor Can Still Be Software Rich”

''Open-source software has been called many things: a movement, a fad, a virus, a Communist conspiracy, even the heart and soul of the Internet. But one point is often overlooked: Open-source software is also a highly effective vehicle for the transfer of wealth from the industrialized world to developing countries.”''

Is FOSS Free?
The popular myth surrounding Free/Open Source Software is that it is always “free”—that is, “free of charge.” To a certain degree this is true. No true FOSS application charges a licensing fee for usage. Most FOSS Linux distributions (Red Hat, SuSE, Debian, etc.) can be obtained at no charge off the Internet. On a licensing cost basis, FOSS applications are almost always cheaper than proprietary software.

However, licensing costs are not the only costs of a software package or infrastructure. It is also necessary to consider personnel costs, hardware requirements, opportunity costs and training costs. Often referred to as the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO), these costs give the clearest picture of the savings from using FOSS.

How large are the savings from FOSS?
There have been recent reports about the tremendous savings from FOSS, most noticeably from giant corporations that have migrated their internal systems to GNU/Linux. Intel reportedly saved US$200 million from a move to GNU/Linux from Unix, and Amazon reported a savings of US$17 million from switching their servers to GNU/Linux. Major financial institutions such as Credit Suisse First Boston, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs and Charles Schwab are moving a significant portion of their infrastructure to FOSS systems to reap these cost savings.

There are a few TCO studies showing the total cost of running FOSS systems versus proprietary systems. These studies analyze multiple cost factors other than software licensing costs, including maintenance, personnel and opportunity costs from service disruptions. Several have been very positive towards FOSS:

 * 1) A TCO study performed by the Robert Frances Group showed that GNU/Linux costs roughly 40 percent of Microsoft Windows and as low as 14 percent of Sun Microsystem’s Solaris
 * 2) NetProject reported that the TCO of GNU/Linux was 35 percent of Microsoft Window’s TCO. Even more interesting was that the savings was due not just to licensing costs but also to various other costs, including reduction in the number of support staff and software updates that results from using GNU/Linux.
 * 3) Gartner reported that using GNU/Linux in a “locked” configuration resulted in a roughly 15 percent lower TCO compared to Windows XP.

Merrill Lynch, a major financial management company, recently reported that using GNU/Linux could reduce costs dramatically. The unusual part of their TCO study was that the largest costs savings was not from software licensing costs but from personnel and hardware costs.

Direct Cost Savings – An Example
Cybersource of Australia has done an analysis of FOSS savings based on a comparison between Microsoft products and FOSS-based software that provide similar functionalities. The study, “Linux vs. Windows: The Bottom Line”, looked at potential savings for three hypothetical companies (A: 50 users; B: 100 users; and C: 250 users). All numbers are in US dollars:

The Cybersource study is straightforward, comparing nothing more than the costs of software packages. The following two tables list the prices of two software solutions, Microsoft and FOSS, for a company of 50 users.

Public sector organizations often have far more users, which means even more dramatic savings. For example, the government of Sweden has identified savings of $1 billion a year while the government of Denmark has identified savings of between $480 million to $730 million.

What are the benefits of using FOSS?
Besides the low cost of FOSS, there are many other reasons why public/private organizations are aggressively adopting FOSS. These include:

 * 1) Security
 * 2) Reliability/Stability
 * 3) Open standards and vendor independence
 * 4) Reduced reliance on imports
 * 5) Developing local software capacity
 * 6) Piracy, IPR, and WTO
 * 7) Localization

Of particular importance to governments are the last four points as they are government-specific. Corporations and end users usually do not deal with these issues.

Security
While there is no perfectly secure operating system or platform, factors such as development method, program architecture and target market can greatly affect the security of a system and consequently make it easier or more difficult to breach. There are some indications that FOSS systems are superior to proprietary systems in this respect:

 * The Gartner Group recommends that businesses switch from Microsoft Internet Information Server (IIS) to Apache or another web server, due to IIS’s poor security track record. The Gartner Group noted that by July 2001 US enterprises had spent US$1.2 billion simply fixing Code Red (IIS-related) vulnerabilities.
 * “Hacker Insurance” issued by J.S. Wurzler Underwriting Managers costs five to 15 percent more if Windows is used instead of GNU/Linux or Unix systems. Walter Kopf, senior vice president of underwriting at J.S. Wurzler Underwriting Managers, says, “We have found out that the possibility for loss is greater using the NT system.”

The security aspect has already encouraged many public organizations to switch or to consider switching to FOSS solutions. The French Customs and Indirect Taxation authority migrated to Red Hat Linux 6.2 largely because of security concerns.

Three reasons are often cited for FOSS’s better security record:

 * Availability of source code:
 * The availability of the source code for FOSS systems has made it easier for developers and users to discover and fix vulnerabilities, often before a flaw can be exploited. Many of the vulnerabilities of FOSS listed in Bugtraq were errors discovered during periodic audits and fixed without any known exploits. FOSS systems normally employ proactive rather than reactive audits.

 * Security focus, instead of user-friendliness:
 * FOSS can be said to run a large part of the Internet and is therefore more focused on robustness and functionality, rather than ease of use. Before features are added to any major FOSS application, its security considerations are considered and the feature is added only if it is determined not to compromise system security.

 * Roots:
 * FOSS systems are mostly based on the multi-user, network-ready Unix model. Because of this, they come with a strong security and permission structure. Such models were critical when multiple users shared a single powerful server—that is, if security was weak, a single user could crash the server, steal private data from other users or deprive other users of computing resources. Consequently, vulnerabilities in most applications result in only a limited security breach.

Reliability/Stability
FOSS systems are well known for their stability and reliability. There are many anecdotal stories of FOSS servers functioning for years without requiring maintenance. However, quantitative studies are more difficult to come by. Here are two of the studies conducted to date:

 * 1) In 1999 Zdnet ran a 10-month reliability test between Red Hat Linux, Caldera Systems OpenLinux and Microsoft’s Windows NT Server 4.0 with Service Pack 3. All three ran on identical hardware systems and performed printing, web serving and file serving functions. The result was that NT crashed once every six weeks but none of the FOSS systems crashed at all during the entire 10 months.
 * 2) A stress test using random testing stressed seven commercial systems and the GNU/Linux system in 1995. Random characters were fed to these systems, to simulate garbage from bad data or users. The result was that the commercial systems had an average failure rate of 23 percent while Linux as a whole failed nine percent of the time. GNU utilities (software produced by the FSF under the GNU project) failed only six percent of the time. A follow-up study years later found that the flaws identified by the study were all fixed in the FOSS system, but were generally untouched in proprietary software.

Open standards and vendor independence
Open standards give users, whether individuals or governments, flexibility and the freedom to change between different software packages, platforms and vendors. Proprietary, secret standards lock users into using software only from one vendor and leave them at the mercy of the vendor at a later stage, when all their data is in the vendor’s proprietary format and the costs of converting them to an open standard is prohibitive.

The authors of the paper “Free/Libre and Open Source Software: Survey and Study” produced by the International Institute of Infonomics in the Netherlands also argue against use of proprietary software in government. They say:

International Institute of Infonomics

Consequently one major argument against the implementation of proprietary software in the public sector is the subsequent dependency on proprietary software vendors. Whenever the proprietary standards are established the necessity to follow them is given. Even in an open tender acquisition system, this requirement for compatibility with proprietary standards makes the system biased towards specific software vendors, perpetuating a dependency.

Another advantage of FOSS is that they almost always use open standards. This is due to two primary reasons:

 * 1) Availability of the source code: With the source code, it is always possible to reverse-engineer and document the standard used by an application. All possible variations are plainly visible in the source code, making hiding a proprietary standard in FOSS systems impossible. Proprietary software, however, are much harder to reverse-engineer and in some cases are deliberately obfuscated.
 * 2) Active standards compliance: When established standards exist, such as HyperText Markup Language (HTML), which controls how web pages are displayed, FOSS projects actively work to follow the standards faithfully. The Mozilla web browser, a FOSS effort, is fully compliant with many standards from the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). Webstandards.org notes that Mozilla is one of the most compliant browsers available today. Compliance with standards is due to the FOSS development culture, where sharing and working together with other applications are the norm. It is also much easier to work with a globally dispersed group of developers when there is a published standard to adhere to.

Using FOSS systems as a means of gaining vendor independence has been raised in several areas. A report to the UK Government concludes that “the existence of an OSS reference implementation of a data standard has often accelerated the adoption of such standards, and recommends that the Government consider selective sponsorship of OSS reference implementations.”

Reduced reliance on imports
A major incentive for developing countries to adopt FOSS systems is the enormous cost of proprietary software licenses. Because virtually all proprietary software in developing countries is imported, their purchase consumes precious hard currency and foreign reserves. These reserves could be better spent on other development goals.

The European study, “Free/Libre and Open Source Software: Survey and Study”, also notes that, “The costs of this more service-oriented model of open source are then also normally spent within the economy of the governmental organization, and not necessary to large multinational companies. This has a positive feedback regarding employment, local investment base, tax revenue, etc.”

Developing local software capacity
It has been noted that there is a positive correlation between the growth of a FOSS developer base and the innovative capacities (software) of an economy. A report from the International Institute of Infonomics lists three reasons for this:

 * 1) Low barriers to entry: FOSS, which encourages free modification and redistribution, is easy to obtain, use and learn from. Proprietary software tends to be much more restrictive, not just in the limited availability of source code, but due to licensing, patent and copyright limitations. FOSS allows developers to build on existing knowledge and pre-built components, much like basic research.
 * 2) FOSS as an excellent training system: The open and collaborative nature of FOSS allows a student to examine and experiment with software concepts at virtually no direct cost to society. Likewise, a student can tap into the global collaborative FOSS development network that includes massive archives of technical information and interactive discussion tools.
 * 3) FOSS as a source of standards: FOSS often becomes a de facto standard by virtue of its dominance in a particular sector of an industry. By being involved in setting the standards in a particular FOSS application, a region can ensure that the standard produced takes into account regional needs and cultural considerations.

The FOSS developmental approach greatly facilitates not only innovation but also its dissemination. A Microsoft internal memo noted, “Research/teaching projects on top of Linux are easily ‘disseminated’ due to the wide availability of Linux source. In particular, this often means that new research ideas are first implemented and available on Linux before they are available / incorporated into other platforms.

Piracy, IPR, and the WTO
Software piracy is a problem in almost every country around the world. The Business Software Alliance estimates that software piracy in 2002 alone cost US$13.08 billion. Even in developed nations where software is affordable in theory, piracy rates were as high as 24 percent in the United States and 35 percent in Europe. Piracy rates in developing countries, where lower incomes make software far more expensive, are upwards of 90 percent.

Software piracy and lax laws against it can and does hurt a country in many ways. A country with poor protection for Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) is not as attractive to foreign investors. Membership in the World Trade Organization (WTO) and access to its benefits are strongly affected by the level of protection given to IPR in a country. Finally, a culture of software piracy hurts local software development, as there is less incentive for local software developers to create a local product.

Localization
Localisation Industry Standards Association

Localization involves taking a product and making it linguistically and culturally appropriate to the target locale (country/region and language) where it will be used and sold.

Localization is one of the areas where FOSS shines because of its open nature. Users are able to modify FOSS to suit the unique requirements of a particular cultural region, regardless of economic size. All that is necessary is the technical capability within a small number of individuals to create a minimally localized version of any FOSS. While the construction of a completely localized software platform is no small feat, it is at least possible. Microsoft’s decision in 1998 against producing an Icelandic version of Windows 98 would have had serious implications if it were not for the emergence of FOSS alternatives.

Most initial FOSS initiatives in the Asia-Pacific region have dealt with localizing FOSS. More details on localization can be found in the “Localization and Internationalization” section of this primer.

What are the shortcomings of FOSS?
For all the benefits FOSS brings, it is not suitable for every situation. There are areas where FOSS needs improvement.

Lack of business applications
While there are many FOSS projects out there today, there are still many areas that lack a full-featured product, especially in the business world. The recent porting of Enterprise Resource Planning platforms such as SAP and Peoplesoft have helped cover the high-end application market, but the Small and Medium Enterprise (SME) market is still poorly served. Basic, polished accounting applications such as QuickBooks, Peachtree or Great Plains do not have FOSS equivalents at this time.

This problem has come about in part due to the scarcity of people competent in both technical and business subjects. Technical developers who encountered problems and wrote software to “scratch an itch” started most of the existing FOSS projects today. These projects are usually fairly technical in nature, such as the creation of web servers, programming languages/environments and networking tools. It is rare for a software developer to encounter accounting problems, for example, and have the business knowledge to create a technical solution.

Interoperability with proprietary systems
FOSS systems, especially on the desktop, are not completely compatible with proprietary systems. For organizations that have already invested massive amounts of capital into proprietary applications and data storage formats, attempting to integrate FOSS solutions can prove to be prohibitively expensive. Changing proprietary standards, which is often aimed at preventing the integration of alternate solutions, exacerbates this problem.

In time, as organizations shift from proprietary to open standards, this problem should be reduced.

Documentation and “polish”
Established FOSS lacks the extensive documentation and user-friendliness found in commercial software. The primary focus of early FOSS developers was functionality. Creating a program that worked well was far more important than ease of use.

Besides the dearth of high-quality documentation, there are also user interface issues with FOSS Graphical User Interfaces (GUI). Because the GUI element in most FOSS systems is not a single element but a collection of different projects glued together, the behaviour of the GUI elements differ greatly. Command-to-save data differ from one program to another, quite unlike proprietary desktop operating systems such as the Mac OS X or Microsoft Windows. Cutting and pasting between different programs can be wildly inconsistent or even impossible. While there is significant ongoing work to unify the desktop, the desktop is likely to remain inconsistent for some time to come.

title: FOSS A General Introduction/Why FOSS?


text:
FOSS A General Introduction/FOSS Success Stories

What are governments doing with FOSS?
Various governments around the world have begun to take notice of FOSS and launch initiatives to reap the benefits it poses. Many of these initiatives are still in the early stages, but there is a significant trend towards incorporating FOSS into procurement and development policies. Besides the large numbers of reports and white papers recommending FOSS solutions, there are reportedly about 70 proposed laws mandating or encouraging FOSS around the world. A few are at the national level while most are at much lower (state or city) levels. The following are highlights of some of the more noteworthy efforts from around the world.

Europe
Besides being home to a significant number of FOSS developers, Europe is also an area with strong government interests in FOSS. In particular, the European Union, Germany, France and the United Kingdom are leading the way in FOSS development.

European Union
The European Union has produced a working paper that stresses Open Standards and encourages Free/Open Source Software where appropriate. The paper, titled “Linking Up Europe: the Importance of Interoperability for E-government Services”, focuses on connecting the different national e-government systems together. It is also critical of past developments that “resulted in closed, vertical, un-scalable and frequently proprietary information systems". This paper was produced as part of the eEurope initiative. The European Union is also creating FOSS competency centers and funding the development of certain health-related applications.

Germany
Germany has many different initiatives underway. The German Bundestag uses Linux on its 150 servers, while the city of Munich plans to switch over 14,000 desktops to Linux, despite Microsoft’s last minute price cuts. The police force is also transitioning 11,000 clients to Linux. It is interesting to note that price is not always the factor cited for the large number of migrations to Linux. Germany’s Interior Minister, Otto Schilly, said, “We are raising computer security by avoiding a monoculture, and we are lowering dependence on a single supplier”. The German Parliament decided in 2001 that FOSS products should be used wherever costs could be decreased by their usage. The Ministry of Finance has an Apache/Linux-based intranet system that supports 15,000 users.

France
The officially sanctioned Agency for Technologies of Information and Communication in Administration (ATICA) counts as part of its mission, “to encourage administrations to use free software and open standards.” The Authority for Customs and Indirect Taxation has also migrated to Linux, citing security reasons. The French agency for e-government has made open standards mandatory for all public administrations to guarantee full interoperability.

United Kingdom
The United Kingdom (UK) has only recently started formulating policy regarding FOSS procurement but the policies that have been produced to date have been favorable towards FOSS. The UK is primarily interested in avoiding the proprietary lock-in problem and has produced a policy to “only use products for interoperability that support open standards and specifications in all future IT developments”. One of the most active proponents of FOSS is the National Health Service, in part due to the insolvency of a proprietary software vendor that forced hospitals to migrate to Linux.

Finland
It is only fitting that the homeland of Linux’s creator is also active in the FOSS arena. One of the more public initiatives is the gradual migration of the city of Turku to Linux and Open Office. All desktop systems will be migrated, with the first pilot project of 200 computers in progress.

The Finnish State Administration is also reportedly considering replacing all of its desktops with Linux, affecting as many as 147,000 computers.

United States
Although there is no official FOSS policy in the US federal government, there have been a number of attempts to pass pro-FOSS legislation at the state level. The states include California, Texas and Oregon. To date none of the bills have been passed but the momentum is not expected to slow down anytime soon.

Finding detailed information about FOSS usage in the US government is difficult, but a survey from MITRE Corporation shows that the US Department of Defense used a total of 115 different FOSS applications, with 251 examples of their use. Additionally, multiple reports recommending the use of FOSS in the US Federal government have appeared, including one by the (US) President’s Information Technology Advisory Committee (PITAC) which recommended that the US “Federal government should encourage the development of open source software as an alternate path for software development for high end computing”.

A few smaller public institutions have shifted over to FOSS platforms. The most well known is the City of Largo, Florida. They have transitioned 900 city employees over to GNU/Linux, saving over $1 million in both hardware and software costs. The City of Largo did more than just use Linux as an operating system; they changed their entire computing model to a thin-client system (something which Microsoft Windows currently cannot do) and as a result saved a huge amount in hardware costs. The city of Houston, Texas has also shifted systems over to a FOSS platform after Microsoft demanded that the city change to a $12 million dollar, multi-year licensing plan.

Peru
Peru is well known within the FOSS community for being one of the first countries in the world to have introduced legislation favoring FOSS in government procurement. The ensuing publicity, Microsoft’s response and Dr. Edgar David Villanueva Nuñez’s (legislation sponsor) powerful reply would occupy IT news media for quite a while. Among the choice quotes from Dr. Nunez’s response are:

''To guarantee the free access of citizens to public information, it is indespensable (sic) that the encoding of data is not tied to a single provider. The use of standard and open formats gives a guarantee of this free access, if necessary through the creation of compatible free software.''

''To guarantee the permanence of public data, it is necessary that the usability and maintenance of the software does not depend on the goodwill of the suppliers, or on the monopoly conditions imposed by them. For this reason the State needs systems the development of which can be guaranteed due to the availability of the source code.''

Although the bill remains stalled (after a US$550,000 donation by Microsoft and pressure from the US Embassy), the reasoning behind the Peruvian bill is something all governments concerned with public data should consider.

Brazil
The Brazilian government plans to migrate 80 percent of all computers in state and state-owned institutions to Linux over the next three years. Pilot programs are already underway and a slow, gradual migration is planned. A “Chamber for the Implementation of Software Libre” has been set up by the government to smooth this transition. Among the reasons cited for this move are lower costs, increased production of local software and “democratiz(ing) access to knowledge”

Regional
The Asia-Pacific region, with its mix of developed and developing nations, is a very active region in FOSS usage and development. Three of the major nations in the area—Japan, South Korea and China—have recently announced an initiative to create a FOSS operating system adapted to their regional needs.

China
China is set to be a major stronghold for FOSS over the next few years. FOSS usage in the country is growing rapidly, with Linux growth alone expected to be 175 percent in 2003.

A primary driver of this massive growth is the Chinese government itself. One of its goals is to create both a hardware and software industry that “will not fall into the foreign intellectual property rights trap”. Rather than becoming dependent on foreign hardware and software vendors, China is trying to develop its local technology industry, and FOSS fits well into its software needs. Recently, the Chinese government announced that government departments would be barred from purchasing foreign produced software, effectively eliminating most proprietary software vendors such as Microsoft and Oracle.

Beyond sponsoring the creation of localized versions of GNU/Linux (Red Flag Linux, Blue Point Linux, etc.), China is also implementing FOSS solutions at the government level. The city of Beijing has had a project to convert 2,000 desktops to Red Flag Linux since 2001. China Post Office signed a deal with IBM to run GNU/Linux at 1,200 branch offices. While these projects cover only a small fraction of the Chinese government, they also serve as capacity-building projects for future transitions.

The Yangfan and Qihang projects launched in January 2002 are part of the Beijing Municipal Government’s computerization project. The goal of these projects is to produce a localized GNU/Linux with functionality, consistency and ease of use matching that of Microsoft Windows 98. Over 150 engineers have completed their initial target of a basic operating system, office suite, web browser and email client. The latest iteration of the project includes font development and experimental transition of government applications to GNU/Linux.

China is also one of three countries (the other two are Japan and South Korea) that are forming a joint FOSS project that would cover the entire spectrum of software, from operating systems to middle ware and desktop applications.

India
While the Indian federal government currently has no official position on the FOSS/proprietary software issue, India represents a hotbed of FOSS development. There are many department level initiatives:

 * 1) The Central Excise Department has moved 1,000 desktops to Linux.
 * 2) The government supercomputer arm, the C-DAC, has moved over entirely to GNU/Linux.
 * 3) The Supreme Court has several pilot projects under way.

At the state level, there have been several FOSS initiatives. The most prominent is the Madhya Pradesh state government’s plan to use Linux in its e-governance and Headstart programs, according to Chief Minister Digvijay Singh. Red Hat has installed its version of Linux on over 6,000 desktops in schools, with more likely to come. The state of Kerala has also several initiatives underway, including e-government and educational initiatives.

Other state level initiatives have been announced, but little has been heard about these initiatives since Microsoft’s much-publicized investment in 2002.

Taiwan
In 2003, Taiwan launched its “National Open Source Plan”, a two-year plan to build a software industry that could replace all of the proprietary software on government and educational systems. The primary drivers for this plan are the existing dependence on a monopoly supplier and the expected cost savings. The National Computer Center is drafting the basic plan while the national education system will be switched to FOSS “to provide a diverse IT education environment and ensure the people's rights to the freedom of information.” Expected savings from the plan are about NT$2 billion for the government and NT$10 billion for the society as a whole.

Thailand
An article in the Bangkok Post on 23 June 2003 reported that the Thailand ICT Ministry had set a target of five percent Linux installations on government systems by the end of 2003. A 10 million baht budget has been allocated. The ultimate goal is to have 50 percent of all government systems on Linux. No time frame has been set for the more ambitious target but pilot projects are already underway.

Thailand's low-cost PC program is also credited with forcing Microsoft to offer both the Windows XP operating system and Microsoft Office for a mere US$40, the lowest price available in the world at present (3rd quarter 2003).

Malaysia
The government has expressed support for FOSS solutions since November 2001. In April 2002, the Association of Computer and Multimedia Industry of Malaysia (PIKOM) produced a paper suggesting that Malaysia “officially embrace OSS” in April 2002. Initial deployment will start on servers and then gradually shift to desktops to minimize disruptions in operations.

Malaysia also launched in July 2002 Komnas, a low-cost computer based on FOSS. Komnas carries a localized version of Linux, including office suite, web browser and various utilities.

Japan
Japan is considering moving its e-government projects over to FOSS platforms due to security problems in Microsoft Windows software. Authorities are reportedly putting together a panel of experts to study FOSS deployment. In the meantime, the Japanese government is moving its entire payroll system over to a GNU/Linux platform. The switch is expected to cut operating costs by half, especially maintenance costs from hardware.

Africa
The South African government has a policy preferring FOSS systems unless there are compelling reasons otherwise. Among the reasons cited for this preference is that with the traditional proprietary software model, South Africa ends up primarily being an importer of software, with little influence over how software is developed. It is hoped that using FOSS systems will change this.

Tanzania is also implementing FOSS systems in its government for cost reasons, while Uganda, Ghana and Zambia are also reportedly moving towards FOSS.

What are some successful FOSS projects?
While FOSS may seem a relatively new concept, it has actually been around since long before the Internet came into existence. FOSS has more than proven that it is ready for prime time, mission-critical usage. In some cases, it is the critical linchpin that makes the Internet possible. The following is a small sample of successful FOSS projects.

BIND (DNS Server)
Internet addresses such as yahoo.com or microsoft.com would not function if not for Domain Name Servers (DNS). These servers take these human-friendly names and convert them into the computer-friendly numeric addresses and vice-versa. Without these servers, users would have to memorize numbers such as 202.187.94.12 in order to use a website.

The Berkeley Internet Name Domain (BIND) server runs 95 percent of all DNS servers, including most of the DNS root servers. These servers hold the master record of all domain names on the Internet. BIND is a FOSS program licensed under a BSD-style license by the Internet Software Consortium.

Apache (Web Server)
Responsible for receiving and fulfilling requests from web browsers, the Apache web server is one of the foundations of the World Wide Web (WWW) as we know it today. Apache has been the number one web server since April 1996 and currently commands 62.53 percent of the total web server market. That is more than double the market share (27.17 percent) of its closest competitor, Microsoft’s IIS server.

These figures fluctuate monthly of course. The latest figures can be found at Netcraft’s Web Server Survey site, at: http://news.netcraft.com/archives/web_server_survey.html.

Sendmail (Email Server)
The Internet as we know it would not exist without email and once again, FOSS is one of the primary drivers. An email server’s (sometimes called a Mail Transport Agent or MTA) function is to deliver user email to its destination. Complex functionality, such as email forwarding and redirection, junk email rejection and routing, makes email servers rather complex systems. The problem of junk email (sometimes referred to as spam) makes security a critical feature, as spammers sending their unsolicited email to unsuspecting users would otherwise hijack an email server and render it useless to legitimate users.

A 2001 survey by D.J. Bernstein found that Unix Sendmail had the largest market share, at 42 percent of all email servers. This was larger than the share of its next two competitors combined, Microsoft Exchange and Unix qmail, with 18 percent and 17 percent, respectively. Note that qmail is a Unix-based email server but is not FOSS as its licensing terms are too restrictive.

OpenSSH (Secure Network Administration Tool)
Because Internet traffic can pass through multiple networks when a user connects into a remote server, security is a major concern. The Secure Shell (SSH) protocol allows system administrators to control their servers from a distance, safe in the knowledge that it is almost impossible to intercept and decipher the information that they may be transmitting.

OpenSSH, a FOSS implementation of the SSH protocol, has grown from a mere five percent of the market in 2000 to 66.8 percent of the market in April 2002. OpenSSH came into existence as a result of a restrictive licensing change in the standard SSH implementation at that time.

OpenOffice (Office Productivity Suite)
While FOSS products have been strong on the server side, FOSS desktop applications are relatively new. Open Office, which is based on the source code of the formerly proprietary StarOffice, is a FOSS equivalent of Microsoft Office, with most of its features. It includes a full-featured word processor, spreadsheet and presentation software. One of the advantages for many considering the shift from a Windows desktop environment to Open Office is that it reads most Microsoft Office documents without problems. This makes the transition relatively painless and Open Office has been used in recent high profile switches from Windows to Linux. While it does not have a very large market share as yet, its usage is expected to grow dramatically over time as more organizations use this full-featured, low-cost application.


text:
FOSS A General Introduction/Linux

What is Linux?
Linux is the most frequently heard FOSS buzzword in the mass media today. However, because of its common usage, the term Linux has been used to refer to broader and broader definitions. It is important to understand the different definitions of Linux to be able to follow the discussions on FOSS.

Linux as the kernel
Linux was originally the name of the kernel, initially, created by Linus Torvalds. A kernel is the critical center point of an operating system that controls CPU usage, memory management and hardware devices. It also mediates communication between the different programs running within the operating system. There are other FOSS kernels, including the Mach kernel that is the core of some of the BSD distributions.

Kernels are to a certain extent interchangeable. Most FOSS applications will run on a Mach kernel, Linux kernel or even the experimental GNU Hurd kernel, without too much difficulty. However, the kernel type greatly influences performance and the hardware platforms that the FOSS system can run on. For instance, the less mature GNU Hurd kernel can run only on the x86 (PC) architecture. The Linux kernel has been ported to run on almost any computing architecture, including the PlayStation 2, mainframes and embedded devices.

Linux as a distribution
The more common usage of Linux today refers to a Linux distribution, which includes far more than the kernel. The Linux distribution (sometimes referred to as the GNU/Linux distribution in recognition of the GNU Project’s significant contribution) contains the Linux kernel at its heart and all the FOSS components required to produce full operating system functionality. This includes the system libraries, GUI, various databases, web servers, email utilities, and others. These same components are also often found on other FOSS and even on proprietary operating systems. For instance, XFree86 is the default GUI foundation in Linux and BSD. XFree86 is also used on proprietary Unix systems such as Solaris, HP-UX and IBM’s AIX system.

Reports that say “Munich May Opt for Linux After All” refer to the Linux distribution, including word processing, printing and email software. Even though the Linux kernel forms less than 0.25 percent (binary file size) of a Linux distribution, its functionality is critical enough to allow the entire distribution to be called Linux.

There is no single Linux distribution. While all distributions contain the Linux kernel at its heart, the FOSS applications included and the configurations supported vary. There are multiple commercial distributions, several freely available, and numerous customized distributions that are targeted to the unique needs of different users. While the FOSS contents of different Linux distributions are mostly identical, they are optimized for different uses such as for high-end servers, user-friendly desktops or even embedded systems. Localized distributions at a minimum include the fonts, input methods and menu translations necessary to use the software in the regional language.

Is Linux FOSS?
The Linux kernel is FOSS, licensed under the GNU General Public License. However, different distributions of Linux contain different components, some of which are not FOSS. For example, the German SuSE Linux distribution includes the non-FOSS YaST (Yet another Setup Tool) installation program.

The Debian GNU/Linux distribution is one of the few distributions that are committed to including only FOSS components (as defined by the Open Source Initiative) in its core distribution.

Where can one obtain Linux?
FOSS, in binary and source code format, is free and downloadable from the Internet. The Linux kernel itself can be downloaded from http://www.kernel.org and other applications from their respective websites. However, most users tend to obtain distributions of Linux. The following is a table of some of the most popular distributors of Linux:

The advantages of going with distributions of Linux are many. The single most important advantage of vendor Linux over “stock” Linux is that it saves users time:

 * 1) Download time: The Linux operating system and complementary software involve large files and long download times. A standard 56kbps modem would take at least 45 days to download a standard 3 CD distribution. Vendors also provide bundled software—browsers, server applications, office suite, etc.—that saves the users from the tedious work of hunting and downloading individual software packages.
 * 2) Installation and compiling time: Many FOSS packages are downloadable only as source code. Users are required to compile and install the software themselves, assuming they are competent enough to do so. On a slow computer, compilation of source code may take days or even weeks. Vendor distributions of Linux often come precompiled and packaged with an easy installation system that takes less than an hour to install on most modern systems.
 * 3) Quality assurance: Vendors typically perform extensive testing to ensure that all of the components work well together. Since FOSS projects are developed independently, there is always the chance that changes in one package have outdated another package. Vendors resolve these dependencies for the user, supplying an integrated package that works “out of the box”.
 * 4) Learning time: Vendors provide manuals and publish reference material (for sale) for their products, making Linux much easier for the average user to learn.

title: FOSS A General Introduction/Linux


text:
FOSS A General Introduction/Intellectual Property Rights and Licensing

What are the licensing arrangements for FOSS?
FOSS is released under a variety of different licenses. There are two primary types of licenses and countless variants. The two main licenses are the GNU (recursive acronym for GNU’s not Unix) General Public License and the BSD-style licenses. A more detailed listing of licenses can be found on the FSF’s website at http://www.fsf.org/licenses/license-list.html.

The GNU General Public License (GPL)
This is designed to ensure that user freedoms under this license are protected in perpetuity. Users are allowed to do pretty much anything they want to a GPL program, including copying, distributing and modifying. The conditions of the license primarily affect the user when it is distributed to another user.

Among the key provisions of distributing GPL software are:
 * 1) The distributor of a GPL program must also make available the source code to the recipient.
 * 2) Any changes made to a GPL program by the distributor must also be licensed under the GPL.
 * 3) Distributors may not place any non-GPL restrictions upon the users they distribute the GPL program to.
 * 4) Recipients of GPL software are granted the same rights to copy, modify and distribute the software as the original distributor.

GPL software forms a significant majority of FOSS: as much as 73 percent of FOSS projects. One of the main motivations for the usage of the GPL in FOSS is assurance that once something is released as FOSS, it will remain so permanently. It is not possible to add additional licensing to strip away a user’s right to redistribute or modify the program. A commercial software company cannot take a GPL program, modify it and then sell it under a different, proprietary license.

The full text of the GPL can be found at http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl.html.

BSD-style Licenses
BSD-style (Berkeley System Distribution) licenses are so named because they are identical in spirit to the original license issued by the University of California, Berkeley. These are among the most permissive licenses possible, because they basically permit users to do anything they wish with the software as long as:

 * 1) Attribution is given to the original licensor by including the original copyright notice in source code files; and
 * 2) No attempt is made to sue or hold the original licensor liable for damages.

Earlier versions required the acknowledgment of the University of California, Berkeley (or whichever organization released the original software) in all promotional material but this requirement has been dropped in most recent versions.

A large number of FOSS projects, including several critical components, are licensed under BSD-style licenses. Examples include:
 * 1) The Apache Web Server – the #1 web server used on the Internet today
 * 2) The XFree86 Window System - the foundation of almost all graphical user interfaces in FOSS systems
 * 3) FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD – all variants based on the original Berkeley System Distribution (BSD) version of Unix; all are widely used on the Internet, especially FreeBSD, which runs Yahoo and Microsoft’s Hotmail services

It is fairly easy to incorporate BSD-style licensed code into commercial applications. Even Microsoft has used some BSD code in the networking portions of its Windows code in the past. Many companies include the Apache web server as part of their commercial software offerings. Unlike the GPL, BSD-style licenses do not require the distribution of source code, allowing a company to hide its modifications to the original code. Nor are companies required to grant users the right to view, modify or distribute the company’s modifications to the code.

A more detailed listing of different software licenses can be found in Annex II.

Can FOSS be combined with proprietary software?
Combining FOSS with proprietary software is possible, depending on the manner of “combination” and on the specific license of the software. Of all the common FOSS licenses, the GNU GPL is the one that requires the most care. It defines “combination” as follows:

''Mere aggregation of two programs means putting them side by side on the same CD-ROM or hard disk. We use this term (...) where they are separate programs, not parts of a single program. In this case, if one of the programs is covered by the GPL, it has no effect on the other program. Combining two modules means connecting them together so that they form a single larger program. If either part is covered by the GPL, the whole combination must also be released under the GPL—if you can't, or won't, do that, you may not combine them.''

In this case, if one uses a proprietary application in a FOSS operating system environment, the proprietary application is unaffected by the licensing of the FOSS system. An example of this is running an Oracle database on a GNU/Linux operating system.

An example of combining programs would be writing an application using the D-Bus message passing library. D-Bus speeds up the development of client and server programs by allowing programs to send messages to each other. D-Bus is licensed under the GPL. Because the completed application program (after a compiler has been through it) would contain source code from the Gnome application framework, the entire application would have to be licensed under the GPL.

However, other programs are licensed under a different version of the GPL called the Lesser GNU Public License (LGPL), such as the GLib utility library. A non-GPL program can use a LGPL library without having to be licensed under the GPL also.

Other licenses are usually far less strict. Writing the same application above using a BSD-style license would only require keeping the attributions to the original licensor within the source code. The matrix below highlights the differences when distributing software combined with GPL or BSD-style licensed software: