Is One Standard Always Better than Two?
In an ideal world, the answer would be "yes." Around these parts, though, the answer depends on the type of standard, time and circumstances, and your views on economic theory.
What’s happening in the world of consortia, standards,
and open source software
The Standards Blog tracks and explains the way standards and open source software impact business, society, and the future. This site is hosted by Gesmer Updegrove LLP, a technology law firm based in Boston, Massachusetts, USA. GU is an internationally recognized leader in creating and representing the organizations that create and promote standards and open source software. The opinions expressed in The Standards Blog are those of the authors alone, and not necessarily those of GU. Please see the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy for this site, which appear here. You can find a summary of our services here. To learn how GU can help you, contact: Andrew Updegrove
In an ideal world, the answer would be "yes." Around these parts, though, the answer depends on the type of standard, time and circumstances, and your views on economic theory.
There was a lot of talking in the Massachusetts Senate Reading Room yesterday at the ODF/XML Open Format. And even some news
I'm currently at the Open Forum at the Mass. State House, and will report in real-time as the meeting proceeds
There's another standards war story that's been running in the news over the past few days that has an eerie sense of familiarity. It goes like this: Two camps can't agree on a standard that is being developed within an existing, well-respected standards body. Eventually one camp takes its effort to Ecma International for approval and fast tracking to an international standard in order to outflank the first standards organization, and to thwart the success of the other camp. Now where have I heard something like that before?
Microsoft has posted a Q&A that is mostly reassuring, and partly flagrant FUD
I've just read Massachusetts ITD General Counsel's challenge to the Senate amendment that would transfer control of the Commonwealth's IT structure to a political task force. The abiding question it raises is this: Why would any sane person want to do this?
It's no surprise that Peter Quinn has been cleared in the investigation over his travel records. But the story won't be over until the Globe tells its readers why it took it upon itself to instigate this fruitless investigation to begin with.
Everything is going as planned (by Microsoft)in Ecma, as the XML Reference Schema Working Group is approved, with only one vote against, and one abstention.
The action continues thick and fast, including a letter of protest from the Computer and Communications Industry Association to Ecma.
I've received a copy of the charter for the proposed Ecma working group that would "standardize" the Microsoft XML Reference Schema. "Rubberstamp" is the better word, if Ecma's members vote to proceed.