I agree with you. I don't like the HL7 policy. The side effect that is bad is that "selling" the specification becomes a conflict of interest issue, because it generates revenue.
Dave At 06:30 AM 8/21/2003 +0530, USM Bish wrote: >On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 09:45:36AM -0600, David Forslund wrote: > > > > Actually, I think the situation is the reverse. It is > > usually fairly easy to get the preliminary versions of a > > standard from HL7 for free (from their web site), but you > > have to pay for the final approved versions. > > > > The OMG policy is a little different. It is easy to get both > > preliminary and final copies of standards from the OMG for > > free, but you can't really participate in the formation of > > the specification standard without being a member. This > > doesn't mean that others can't make suggestions, but the > > responsibilty of finalizing the standard lies solely with > > the members. > >I would assume that the path set by Object Management Group, >W3C Consortium etc would be the expected thing. It is fair >enough to keep the policy making aspects inhouse, but >availability of the standards themselves need to be open. > >Bish > > > >- >If you have any questions about using this list, >please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org - If you have any questions about using this list, please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org
