MA Senator Decries OpenDocument Decision

An anonymous reader writes to mention a ZDNet article on Massachusetts senator Marc Pacheco's OpenDocument study. The report blasts the decision to switch to the OSS-friendly document format, saying the state's IT division didn't have the authority to make that decision and has disregarded the needs of disabled citizens. From the article: "'The process, quite frankly, was driven by one individual in a very powerful position (Kriss) issuing a memo to an individual in a less powerful position (Quinn). Then he was told to get it done and forget about any obstacles,' Pacheco said. Although OpenDocument is not yet widely used, other government entities, including Belgium, have expressed interest in OpenDocument as a standard as well."

Comments

Apples & Oranges

[eldavojohn]

Microsoft Office has built-in help for people with disabilities, such as voice synthesizers, special screen readers and enlargers, Winske said. But he said OpenDocument-based products do not yet.

OpenDocument is a standard format for documents that anyone can use. It doesn't have anything to do with voice synthesizing or special screen readers. That's the editor/viewing application's responsibility or capability.

You are witnessing ignorance when someone claims a format is insufficient because a suite of applications supports more functionality.

The real irony is that someone will probably write a plug-in for MS products to use OpenDocument anyway.

Microsoft's eager to offer plug-ins for nearly any other proprietary file format. It just seems that the second someone tries to give something they worked on away for free, Microsoft starts criticizing it as being too slow for the user.

'The process, quite frankly, was driven by one individual in a very powerful position (Kriss) issuing a memo to an individual in a less powerful position (Quinn). Then he was told to get it done and forget about any obstacles,'

And what's wrong with that? Happens all the time. You put a person in a powerful position and they make executive decisions. They are busy so they delegate it to someone else. I'm waiting for the reason that this was a bad move. Do you expect a board to discuss and delegate on every issue down to what file format is used by the government? Do you want the process to require that much time and resource?

Nobody's crapping bricks when the sewage administrator is mandating standardized units being used on reports for the city's waterways and sewers now, are they? Won't somebody please think about the vertically disabled people that like to report their height in centimeters, not inches so that it's a larger number and they feel taller?

<sarcasm>My god, the state's IT Division is trying to advise the state government on what file format to adopt. What is this world coming to?</sarcasm>

After delivering his speech, John Winske shook hands with Steve Ballmer & was seen struggling to drag away a visibly overladened burlap sack with a giant green '$' on the front of it.

Re:Apples & Oranges

[Frosty Piss]

OpenDocument is a standard format for documents that anyone can use. It doesn't have anything to do with voice synthesizing or special screen readers. That's the editor/viewing application's responsibility or capability.

The point is, does OpenOffice or whatever apps are currently available that use the OpenDoc format has the same level of help for people with disabilities as Office? Obviously it's (mostly) the app not the format that addresses this, but it's a valid bitch: Does OpenOffice or any of the other semi-mature non-Microsoft applications have support for disabilities at or better than MS Office? Most people who are not completely blinded by ideology will say honestly, "not yet".

Re:Apples & Oranges

[Kadin2048]

You are witnessing ignorance when someone claims a format is insufficient because a suite of applications supports more functionality.

Years of using programs like Microsoft Word and other proprietary applications have gotten people used to thinking that applications and document formats have a 1:1 relationship. It's so rare, outside of a few widely-accepted interchange formats (txt, jpg, gif, bmp, etc.) to be able to use a single document format across a number of applications, without the format "belonging" to one particular program, that people can't separate the two anymore.

People criticize software for things they don't like in the format -- even though many programs today (including OO) can use many different document formats -- and they criticize the format for things they don't like in whatever's perceived to be "its" application.

People who are pushing Open Standards need to be more clear about the difference between a format and the software that uses it. 'OpenDocument' is a format, OpenOffice.org is just one of the many applications that can use that format.

That said, the MA politician in the article is a first-class tool, so I wouldn't count on ever educating his type, except through large wads of cash. I wouldn't be surprised to find he's getting some sort of kickback from Redmond at some level, or has a personal grudge against the IT office, or is hoping to make this into some bit of a power play. I doubt very much he gives two squirts of piss about the actual issue; it's just "an issue" to him.

Re:Apples & Oranges

[lynx_user_abroad]

[D]oes OpenOffice or whatever apps are currently available that use the OpenDoc format has the same level of help for people with disabilities as Office?

Does Microsoft Office (the only application which fully supports the Microsoft Office format) offer the same level of help for people without Microsoft Office on their machine as OpenDoc apps do?? Do you really think this world (or Mass. even) has more "people with disabilities" than it has "people without Microsoft Office"?

Most people who are not completely blinded by their own addiction to Microsoft will honestly say "no".

You're living in the here and now. In ten years or so, even you will be disabled when it comes to reading Microsoft Office documents produced in the current version of Microsoft Office unless those documents have been converted to whatever new format Microsoft will be pushing then.

Ten years ago, your computer was (likely) running Win95 (because Win98 won't be available for another two years yet). Documents produced in 1996 by whatever version of Word Microsoft was pushing back then might still be mostly readable in the current version. But if they aren't, good luck finding a copy of the OS and a copy of the application which created them to use.

Now think about 20 years ago. 50 years? We're not talking about some school-kid's homework, we're talking about Public Records which belong to the residents of Mass. in 2106 as much as the Mass. Constitution belongs to the residents of the Commonwealth today.

Re:Apples & Oranges

[flacco]

Welcome to the harsh political reality that sometimes, a group of people is so small that it's not worth the effort to go for their votes.

like blind people?

Help for Disabilities?

[neonprimetime]

Microsoft Office has built-in help for people with disabilities, such as voice synthesizers, special screen readers and enlargers, Winske said. But he said OpenDocument-based products do not yet.

Keyword being yet ... but when it does ... it will be standardized ... reusable ... and in the long run more useful than the crap MSFT slapped together.

Accessability Is for everyone

[CastrTroy]

My apologies for copying ideas of another poster I've seen post on this subject before, but here it goes. When it comes to reading computer file formats we are all disabled. No human can easily read a computer file format. That's why formats with actual standards are so important. So that we can all have equal access to the information stored within those files. Sure there may not be screen readers available right now, but if there is a market for them (and there is), then they will come. Especially if these formats come into wide use. Also, these accessibility tools will be much better because they know how to read the format. They don't have to struggle through and hack like crazy, just to make them work. They could even make an entire word processor specifically for the disabled, made to work with the abilities they have. A blind person doesn't need an interface like everyone else does. They need a completely different tool to compose documents than the rest of us. A standard format would make these tools easier to develop.

Another note. I thought screen readers just read the text on your screen, regardless of what program is displaying them. I guess I was wrong about this, since Accessibility seems to be a big issue.

Chain of command

[truthsearch]

The process... was driven by one individual in a very powerful position (Kriss) issuing a memo to an individual in a less powerful position (Quinn).

Um, isn't that how everything gets done? A superior instructs a person lower-down on the totem pole to complete a task? In theory the person in the "very powerful position" is the person with the authority to make such decisions. So... what's the problem?

An Even Better Proposed Format

[eldavojohn]

Most people who are not completely blinded by ideology will say honestly, "not yet".

Ah, you're right, I am blinded by my own zeal. Thank you for helping me see the light.

Not only should we select a document format that supports speech, but that should be embedded into the file format as a wav. I think that this will make it easier for applications to play it for the user.

Also embedded in the document will be a massive bitmap containing high resolution images with enlarged fonts for our users hard of sight.

We're not sure, either, if the people will all have the same true type font so we'll go ahead and embed that in the file too. Wait, better include the codecs for the image and sound snippets. Oh, and I guess we can't be sure the viewer can read them so we'll include the viewer too.

My, oh my, this is much better than the crappy OpenDocument format I used in my prior ideology.

I just opened up MS Word and typed "Hello World!" and saved it to my desktop. 24,064 bytes. Why? What in God's name is that bloated app bloating in it's bloated files?

Obviously it's (mostly) the app not the format that addresses this, but it's a valid bitch...

Arguing for MS Office is not a "valid bitch."

Re:An Even Better Proposed Format

[Mattintosh]

I just opened up MS Word and typed "Hello World!" and saved it to my desktop. 24,064 bytes. Why? What in God's name is that bloated app bloating in it's bloated files?

From what I recall, it saves a memory dump to a file. That would include app state, undo, and other information that didn't need to survive, and it shoves it into semi-permanent storage. This explains a bunch of retarded, mind-boggling things we've all heard (and disbelieved) about Word, such as:
1) There are old, deleted, removed items still lingering in the saved data. (Proven, and has bitten people in the ass. I'm guessing it's Undo steps saved as part of the dump.)
2) Your example - "Hello, World!" takes 24k. (How much working memory does a fresh instance of Word use in the amount of time it takes to open a new document from the Normal template, type something, and save it? I'd guess about 24k.)
3) Every Word release comes with a new format, while Excel and other Office apps don't always have a new format. (The app footprint changes with every release, of course, so the memory dump does too.)
4) Word can usually open its own format very quickly, while other apps take FOREVER to import it. (It just loads working memory with whatever's in the file, while other apps don't use the same info and have to figure out what everything means.)
5) Word sometimes can't even open its own format. (Whoops, something got out of place before this file was dumped, now Word can't reconstruct its memory map! CRASH!)

Absolutely retarded. And Microsoft has the nerve to ask why anyone would want to use other software. I dare them to ask why anyone would want to use THEIR insecure, buggy, incompatible, locked-in, proprietary, asstastic formats and the apps that produce them. Microsoft should've stuck to what it did best: make Excel better.

Re:An Even Better Proposed Format

[maxume]

So pragmatism only works if it occurs along the lines of your personal ideology? It makes perfect sense for Massechusetts to move in the direction of using odf. However, discontinuing the use of Office before application support for odf is equal to that of Office makes no sense at all.

I don't even need to make some crazy argument about including a dictionary of definitions of words used(recursive even) in the document.

As far as what is in the bloated file, who cares? If you want a text file, use a text file, Word is a word processing/document layout monstrosity.

Re:An Even Better Proposed Format

[grcumb]

"You can argue until you're blue in the face that document format and application features are two separate things, but this fact remains: if you dictate a format, then people have to use an application that supports the format!"

An application that supports the format? You mean, like, Microsoft Office?

I think you're the one missing the point here. Anyone who argues apps agains formats is liable to fall into the same logical hole: Just because an app - or an app-maker, for that matter - doesn't support a format today, doesn't mean that they can't or won't. The mere fact that it is standard and required will almost inevitably be enough to ensure that someone steps up and supports the format.

Ultimately, the whole point of open formats is the exact opposite of telling someone which application they can or cannot use. The truth of it is that open formats allow the customer to decide what's best for him, without fear of finding himself at the mercy of a single, predatory vendor.

Disabled Citizens?

[deviantphil]

saying the state's IT division didn't have the authority to make that decision and has disregarded the needs of disabled citizens.

How about poor citizens who can't afford the Microsoft Tax?

Other things to stay away from..

[Rob T Firefly]

Here are just a few other standard, non-proprietary ideas with beginnings similar to ODF. If the distinguished Senator wishes to put his money where his mouth is, he'll have to avoid:

• The Web - HTML is a non-proprietary file format that was developed without regard for every last accessibility option in mind. Who was thinking of screen readers in 1981?
• In fact, the entire Internet - Who would have thought back when they came up with packet-switching networks in general and TCP in particular, that it would be used in the variety of ways we do now, and adapted to aid the disabled? No more use of digital networking devices for our esteemed Senator.
• Television - When the first moving pictures were broadcast in the first half of the 20th Century, nobody had come up with a way for the hearing-impaired to more fully enjoy the content. Because it took until the 1970s to include sign-language translators in the lower corner of the screen (remember them?) and later develop closed captioning, modern TV should never have taken off like it did, and we should have fully investigated more proprietary standards than what was used. Boycott it all.
• In fact, Faraday and his ilk weren't considering any of this when they were poking around the EM spectrum in the 19th century, so the Senator should avoid wireless transmissions entirely. No radio, no mobile phone, no ordering burgers through the drive-in speaker.
• Speaking of driving, the inconsiderate cave person who developed the wheel never even bothered to take into account how to properly implement his or her creation in a wheelchair for the physically challenged. It took ages (literally!) before such a solution was put into practice. Screw the damned inconsiderate neolithics and their crappy invention. No wheels.

But what's the cost savings?

[popo]

To say that Opensource programs don't offer benefits to handicapped people -- a group who continuously gets short shrift when it comes to state and government budgeting -- is a little ironic.

Why not transfer the cost savings of switching from MS Office to OO.org to a budget for handicapped services. I'm sure the handicapped population would be more than happy with that.

It's always about the bottom line

[kthejoker]

As an employee of a state's executive branch, I can assure you that for us, cost is far and away the most important aspect in making any sort of A vs B comparison. Our entire system is driven by the lowest bidder. (And if you save $50 on something you don't care about, that means you get to spend $50 extra on something you do. Governors are very, VERY specific as to what they do and don't care about.)

And ODF = free.

In fact, I'm fairly certain that if Massachusetts wanted to hire 5-10 developers to create a program to deal with ODFs in a disability-accessible manner, it still wouldn't cost as much as using proprietary software.

You're Missing the Point

[nathanh]

Does OpenOffice or any of the other semi-mature non-Microsoft applications have support for disabilities at or better than MS Office? Most people who are not completely blinded by ideology will say honestly, "not yet".

You're confusing the document format with one of the many applications that can read/write that format. The state mandate was for Open Document. You're complaining that Open Office - one of 15 applications that can read/write Open Document - is inferior to Microsoft Office.

Microsoft could quite easily write a plugin to read/write Open Document. Microsoft Office already support dozens of other formats of dubious quality and relevance. Open Document is clearly relevant and IMO of very high quality. Why is Open Document such a problem for Microsoft? I think I know why. Do you?

I'm disabled...

[CptPicard]

... and although my own disability doesn't restrict my computer use in any way, I still find this kind of ideological abuse totally disgusting. Open standards are, in the end, beneficial for access by everybody using any chosen access means. This includes not only the disabled, but everyone else as well. It is immaterial that things like screen readers may not exist yet.. they can be produced, and will be, if the specs are available. Anybody with even slight programming experience will know that in this case existing software is probably easy to modify to just read the new format into the program's internal representation. Contrast this with whatever limited access proprietary formats' owners choose to grant -- and to whom -- in order to look good.

Not to mention these same guys at this end of the political spectrum in general typically won't give a shit about disabled people's rights in anything, as mostly, we're just "bad for the economy". Apparently we can still be "useful" in some situations.

They should just speak for themselves and not get all caring and compassionate all of a sudden when it serves their own interest.