The software which comprises the operating system and applications we run on a daily basis is all ultimately broken down into files stored on various storage devices on our computers, such as CD/DVD drives, hard drives, and even network storage. But these files are fundamentally different than the files which comprise our personal data, simply because of their highly contrasting origins and purposes. The purpose of the files which comprise our software is to load into working memory and allow us to perform our tasks and manipulate our data; we ideally should not have to think or worry about the origins of these files, the computer should just work. The files which comprise our personal data, however, are there for our consumption, our modification, our sharing with others; it's the stuff we and others create, share, and ultise.

All of the files on computers are ultimately stored as streams of bits, or 1s and 0s, on the storage mediums. In order for the software on the computer to understand what those bits even mean, there needs to be an established standard for every given form your data could be in: be it text documents, audio files, videos, or images. Each of these files, in order to be readable, arrange their streams of 1s and 0s in a particular way following a certain set of rules, called the file's format. The landscape of file formats is incredibly expansive and diverse, but the Hampshire GLUG urges others to only use file formats with freely available specifications that are not under the constant threat of patent litigation aimed against those who choose to use the format

This is where the dichotomy between software and data file formats becomes most clear: understanding the difference between the two we can come to the conclusion that having and using established free formats for all types of data should be an even higher priority than using Free Software. As long as freely licensable and patent unencumbered file formats are available, then we should absolutely only use those so that we can ensure universal access to the data. This is especially important for the government, whose increasingly digitised documents should all be accessible to the citisenry of its nation and universally accessible. We should not accept being forced to buy a several hundred dollar proprietary application in order to read and exchange office documents with our governments or schools.

The special concept to understand when it comes to free formats is that by definition, they are freely implementable into any software, whether proprietary or Free: Microsoft, Inc. for example, could implement the international ISO standard OpenDocument into Microsoft Office at no cost or large difficulty. This does not happen because it is in Microsoft's best interest to restrict access to our own data so that the only way we are able to read it is to purchase newer versions of their software. It is not as if all proprietary applications lock users in with repsect to file formats, though: many proprietary applications support industry standard free file formats. Proprietary web browsers such as Microsoft's Internet Explorer and Opera can read HTML documents, Sun Microsystems' StarOffice supports OpenDocument format, and Adobe Photoshop can read and write to a number of free image formats including JPEG, GIF, and PNG.

If anyone publishes or gives a copy of their data, the recipients should never have to resort to purchasing patent licenses in order to access it or be locked into a single vendor's solution. It is to the recipient's benefit to be ensured that they can read it, and likewise it is to the sender/publisher's benefit that they can as well. Finally, it is to humanity's benefit if the collective digitised data we publish on all corners of the Internet be universally accessible. Do not mistake this goal for mandatory sharing of private information, such as corporate financial data or personal communication: there are many technological methods for keeping that data safe from public eyes, including not making it available on the public Internet or encryption. Even in those cases though, it is still to the benefit of all parties involved to use free file formats.

There exists an extremely diverse variety and vast amount of file formats that have been developed throughout the computing industry's relatively short existence. The technological variety and relative strengths and weaknesses of these formats is tough to grasp at first, and legal barriers such as closed specifications and the threat of patent litigation serve only to complicate matters more. The Hampshire GLUG therefore is making a best attempt to provide a simple list of free file formats for multiple types of data, along with recommendations on how to best take advantage of the strengths of each. We promise to add any and all formats possible which are freely implementable with open standards, and which have no generally acknowledged patents covering them.

Suggestions for revisions to this list are welcomed to further hone the accuracy and helpfulness of this information.