[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: [xml-d ev] Yo
> Now, any discussion comparing various standards and specification bodies > needs to show how, for example, the ISO process has caused, say, ANSI C++ to > be a fairer, cleaner, more widely-implemented, less vendor-bound, freer, > and/or less bug-ridden spec than non-ISO specs like XML or HTTP. Access, openness, constituencies and the number of competing specs are also issues. Expensive specifications and extensive travel requirements inhibit access and openness. We're seeing more specs that are freely-downloadable or cost $18 for an electronic version. There are also more working groups augmenting F2F meetings with telcons. Ubiquitious broadband means video conferencing is on the horizon so the financial barriers are fading. Constituencies are a different story. ISO voting will still consist of representatives of national standards bodies. Consortium voting is often by persons who represent a company that's a technology provider in a competitive space. Neither paradigm is always good or always bad. Competition will continue stirring the standards pot. If you employ a number of ISO voting representatives, then the ISO path looks good. If not, you might prefer to work first through an organization such as ECMA or create a new alliance (e.g., Enterprise Grid Alliance, recent RFID alliances). Competing alliances and consortia sometimes produce competing specs. As Jim Gray said recently, the result is you have lots of ten-page specs instead of a single standard and an ISO spec that run to hundreds of pages.
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|