Hi there,
On Monday 31 October 2011 10:45:04 Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
Hello,
2011/10/26 Marcos Marado mindboosternoori@gmail.com:
In Portugal, after having a law that forces the Government to use Open Standards, there's now this division defining how and which open standards to support... The consultation about it ends at the 30th, and we're still in the middle of the work for it. Several questions already rose, tho... And I'm
hoping someone can help us answering them in this last few days:
Sorry I missed the deadline.
No problem, this is just one of the steps for this process, and your feedback is very appreciated...
- TLS 1.1 or 1.2 (since the biggest F.S. browsers don't support it)
- is it true that konqueror supports them?
- is it true that midori supports them?
- is there any (free software) mail client that supports SMTPS, POP3S
and IMAP3S using TLS 1.1 or 1.2 (which one?)
I think neither Firefox nor Thuderbird support TLS 1.1 or TLS 1.2, even though it has been underway for a few years now (both use NSS). I don't think we should advocate old standards just because some FOSS does not support it, rather do it the other way, use the standard requirement as an argument to get funding from the public sector to implement support in FOSS (although I'm sure it's not easy).
Yeah, that was/is our general position, even if it's not that easy to do recomendations in that state, without giving implementation examples... And while I would love to see the funding from the public sector to implement support in FOSS, I surely won't hold my breath.
- is there any free software at all supporting (even if only partially)
the XBRL standard?
Never heard.
Not only it seems this is silently starting to be mandatory in an hell lot of countries (which caught me by surprise, I only noticed it to search for this matter...), it is encumbered with patents, so not considered by us as an open standard.
I think open standards is the way to go. Governments should enforce them by requiring support with clausules like "X standard version x.x or newer" where the x.x should be the version of the standard that was released at least three years ago. In some software, free or not, cannot keep up with the standard in three years, we should put effort in software development rather than lobbying for stagnation in standards requirements.. sometimes this can be though, dough.
Agreed. It actually caught my attention that the work we're doing in Portugal for this, and some other countries do/did for the same purpose would give us quite good material for a list of "things needed", both regarding open standards and free software supporting them...
Best regards, and thanks for your reply,