I think that these proposed guidelines are well done and address many of the key issues about openness and transparency.

In the "Participation" section, I found the term "citizen-created" to be a bit confusing, particularly since so much open source software has been developed by foundations and companies, many of which involve non-citizens. The first sub-item makes the clear statement about public input, so it might be OK to leave out "citizen-created" in its current location. Next is the more controversial issue of whether government agencies should specify a preference for open source software, as is done in Brazil, France, and Norway.  In such situations, the supplier would have to justify the use of proprietary software.  In the transparency section, those of us working on OSFA understand the meaning of "open file format standards", but it would help to add an example or two for clarity.  Also, if we are going to use Latin, then we should put "ex parte" in italics. Finally, a small grammatical note.  In the third sentence of the Transparency section, the referent for the word "This" is unclear.  How about "Such releases increase...."