[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: ISO and the Standards Golden Hammer (was Re: You

  • To: 'Rich Salz' <rsalz@d...>, Ken North <kennorth@s...>
  • Subject: RE: ISO and the Standards Golden Hammer (was Re: You call that a standard?)
  • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
  • Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 08:57:51 -0500
  • Cc: xml-dev@l...

hammer definition
I believe that some folks want to do away with ISO altogether.  
It lets them do whatever they like with whomever they like 
and then push that out on to a public that can't tell the
difference via labeling it a standard through an organization 
that could care less.  Let the buyer beware.  That is fine 
until the middle tier vendor has to sign an indemnity agreement 
for that technology while the first vendor merely has 
to claim, it's 'standard'.

I am not saying and have not said, "ISO only" 
but that consortia working with ISO stand a better 
chance of producing a reliable standard.  ISO is only 
guaranteeing a process.  It is the consortia practices, 
particularly the IP agreements as bound by the participation 
agreements that one relies on.

As I asked Dare, would you agree that if the following 
is asked, a better deal results:

1.  It is ISO standard (which has a specific meaning) 
    but created by technical committees from consortia 
    (not the marketing guys who go to committee meetings 
    to represent their bosses' viewpoint).

2.  Is Royalty-free by dint of a signed participation 
    agreement.

3.  Comes with conformance tests and a test mark (a 
    formal variation of a trade mark).

So now, 'standard' has a meaning.  The quality of the 
standard is as good as the consortium members that 
produce it, but the meaning is clear, the IP is 
open, and conformance tests ensure that something 
claimed to be 'standard' actually is.

As long as people continue to dis solutions that 
might work, we might as well go back to the proprietary 
solutions and push for indemnity clauses.  If this 
can't be done through the standards groups, there 
are very few other alternatives.

len

From: Rich Salz [mailto:rsalz@d...]


Most of these weren't ISO/ITU committees, but were either private
industry consortia, or other standards work that got a "finishing
polish."  In fact, the only one I know of that was ISO from start
to finish is X.400, which surely must be considered a temporary
success at best, if not an overall failure and waste of time.

I believe when most folks say "what has ISO done," they want examples that
started in ISO (or ITU, most folks comingle them), rather than another
phase on an existing work.  If all you need is the latter, than just have
ISO versions of IP, TCP, HTTP/1.1, and SSL.

So, can anyone point to ISO/ITU success in the computer (software) field?

PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
 

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.


Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.