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

"Standards Business Technology" development effort required? (was RE: [x

• To: "'Bob Glushko'" <glushko@S...>, "'Paul Sumner Downey'" <Paul.Downey@w...>, "'Michael Kay'" <michael.h.kay@n...>, "'Robin Cover'" <robin@i...>, "'Bullard, Claude L \(Len\)'" <clbullar@i...>
• Subject: "Standards Business Technology" development effort required? (was RE: ISO and the Standards Golden Hammer (was Re: [xml-d ev] You call that a standard?))
• From: "Bob Wyman" <bob@w...>
• Date: Sat, 1 May 2004 19:24:15 -0400
• Cc: "'Rich Salz'" <rsalz@d...>, "'Ken North'" <kennorth@s...>, <xml-dev@l...>
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <5.1.0.14.2.20040501153053.05711e40@p...>
• Reply-to: <bob@w...>

Bob Glushko wrote:
> holding the meetings all over the world didn't really help
> make the standards process more open because it was
> effectively putting a travel budget hurdle in place for
> all but the large firms.
	Back when I was at Digital, we started a group called
"Software Business Technology" that was focused on the technology of
the software business. We identified and then built solutions to four
problems that today are mere vague memories:
	1. Distribution media: We chose CDROM rather than the dozens
of distribution media then in use: (i.e. various forms of nine-track
tape, DECTAPE, disks, cartridges, etc.)
	2. On-line Documentation (so that we didn't need to cut down
forests every time we released a new version of VMS...)
	3. Common software installation technologies (rather than
having each product do its own thing)
	4. Software licensing (to allow all products to be distributed
on a single disk set)

	The impact on the "software business" was pretty profound...

	Do we need a similar effort to address the "technology of the
standards business?" i.e. Do we need "Standards Business Technology?" 
	Currently, the standards business seems to rely a great deal
on face-to-face meetings in addition to mailing lists and telephone
conferencing. What might make sense would be to do a concerted effort
to either develop or select technology that could be used for hosting
remote discussions and working sessions over the Internet. Basically,
VOIP and remote conferencing. (Perhaps, what we need is a standards
based version of something like PalTalk (www.paltalk.com) ) ... Such a
system would allow people to participate in standards discussions by
voice and video from anywhere in the world as long as they had
reasonably high-speed network access. Anyone could "listen" with just
the equipment built into the normal computer while the hardware
required to participate actively (microphone and optional video
camera) would be available at a fraction of the cost of a single night
in a hotel.
	Other than the "travel" problem, what other significant
problems exist in the standards world that can be addressed with
technology?

		bob wyman

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: "Standards Business Technology" development effort required? (was RE: ISO and the Standards Golden Hammer (was Re: [xml-d ev] You call that a standard?))
    • From: Michael Champion <mc@x...>

• References:
  • RE: ISO and the Standards Golden Hammer (was Re: [xml-d ev] You call that a standard?)
    • From: Bob Glushko <glushko@S...>

• Prev by Date: Re: ISO and the Standards Golden Hammer (was Re: You call that a standard?)
• Next by Date: Re: "Standards Business Technology" development effort required? (was RE: ISO and the Standards Golden Hammer (was Re: [xml-d ev] You call that a standard?))
• Previous by thread: RE: ISO and the Standards Golden Hammer (was Re: [xml-d ev] You call that a standard?)
• Next by thread: Re: "Standards Business Technology" development effort required? (was RE: ISO and the Standards Golden Hammer (was Re: [xml-d ev] You call that a standard?))
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread