[fosscomm] [Fwd: Letter to Secretary, DIT]
jituviju at gmail.com
Fri Jul 17 09:49:32 PDT 2009
Some confusion for me.in what Andrew wrote:
> it was felt that a review of the policy( which policy, which version )was
> required due to the earlier (when?)representation,
> and that after the review it(revision or original policy) was found
> Also mentioned was the fact that there were a number of letters this time
> in support of open standards to counter the suggestion for multiple
> standards from NASSCOM and MAIT, and would provide sufficient reason to
> retain it (presumably 'single' and 'open' standard) without change.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the network