On 27/10/2010 21:10, Grahame Grieve wrote:
>> In all other industries, the quality of standards is
>> measured initially against public safety and then
>> against criteria of effectiveness and economic qualities.
> it seems you mean, by market testing. If not, do you have an example?

well yes and no. Products produced by big companies of course have to 
undergo all kinds of testing to do with safety. With respect to fitness 
for purpose, the market will certainly sort a lot out. But to get to 
market, you have to have completely implemented and productised the 
offering - which means going way past the paper stage. By the time 
standards agencies see these things, they are guaranteed to 'work', the 
only question is to do with what they interoperate with.

>> In all other industries that i know of, standards are
>> created by a process whose inputs are already developed
>> and productised offerings from companies
> I presume you refer to non-it industries. In IT the picture is rather
> more mixed. You certainly aren't describing the omg process, or the
> itu process, or the w3c process here.

IT in recent decades has become quite poor, no doubt about it. Older 
standards (e.g. older network standards) tended to have hardware 
implications, and they simply could not be issued without having being 
implemented somewhere. In more recent times, W3C does at least manage 
some implementations of what it issues, but is mainly helped by major 
tech companies implementing the standards. Nevertheless, standards like 
XML Schema are still horrible, very weak formal underpinning, and hardly 
fit for purpose (being a document-based idea trying to satisfy data 
representation requirements). See 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XML_Schema_Language_Comparison .

OMG has better process than any SDO in e-health, but the output is not 
always that inspiring. UML 2 is awful (try reading the 'infrastructure' 
and 'superstructure' specs - you really have to wonder what drugs they 
were taking), as is XMI. Which is why the Eclipse Modelling Framework 
(EMF) sprung up in the modelling space - to provide a usable alternative 
to XMI.

> A truly valid comparison would be with IT standards in other vertical
> markets. Insurance always strikes me as applicable. Do you have any
> examples from these spaces?
*
* I know a bit about investment, and there is to be sure, less to 
standardise. The interesting comparisons I think are in construction, 
mobile telephony, automotive, telecomms, etc. Standards just don't get 
issued as paper with no products behind them in these industries.

- thomas

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20101027/f1d217de/attachment.html>

Reply via email to