[OpenISO] Vision for OpenISO.org beyond MS-OOXML

[Seth Johnson]

One thing you might consider is targeting the forays of the ITU into
standards that undermine the genericity and flexibility of the
Internet platform.  Perhaps one might consider that standards that
would counter the separation of layers (particularly the IP layer), be
at least distinguished from those that would not.  The end result
would be that there would be a "brand" -- whatever distinguishing term
is used -- for true end-to-end, flexible connectivity that empowers
end user innovation (and that inherently provides "network
neutrality," as this is the actual technical basis for that).


Seth Johnson


Norbert Bollow wrote:
> 
> While I'm glad that the work on the "OpenISO.org Problem Report on
> OOXML" is finally starting to go forward, I'm also thinking about
> what contributions OpenISO.org should aim to make more generally.
> 
> Should OpenISO.org work only in the area of reviewing specifications
> that are developed elsewhere, or is it appropriate to also take the
> initiative and try developing specifications from scratch?
> 
> A successful protocol or data format specification needs a tight
> design focus and a clear market need.
> 
> This reality makes "design by committee" highly problematic, because
> the main engineering goal of protocol and data format design is to
> provide the needed features while avoiding all needless complexity.
> However incorporating everyone's ideas results in needless complexity.
> On the other hand, in committee environments, not incorporating
> everyone's ideas results in constant objections.
> 
> Consequently, most successful specifications today originate outside
> the committees of standardization organizations.  That however is also
> problematic because that means that they orginate outside of any
> environment that requires up front commitments from participants to
> not play nasty games with patents.
> 
> I really think that OpenISO.org could fill a gap by facilitating an
> environment in which protocol and data format specification can happen
> with a tight design focus and in view of specific market needs, while
> at the same time ensuring that the important expectation of openness
> of the process are not violated.
> 
> Specifications developed in this way under the OpenISO.org umbrella
> would afterwards be submitted for broader review to the IETF and/or to
> ISO/IEC JTC1 with the goals of further refinement and expanding the
> community of adopters.
> 
> Greetings,
> Norbert.
> 
> --
> Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch>                      http://Norbert.ch
> President of the Swiss Internet User Group SIUG    http://SIUG.ch
> Working on establishing a non-corrupt and
> truly /open/ international standards organization  http://OpenISO.org
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at openiso.org
> http://openiso.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

-- 

RIAA is the RISK!  Our NET is P2P!
http://www.nyfairuse.org/action/ftc

DRM is Theft!  We are the Stakeholders!

New Yorkers for Fair Use
http://www.nyfairuse.org

[CC] Counter-copyright: http://realmeasures.dyndns.org/cc

I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or distribution
of this incidentally recorded communication.  Original authorship
should be attributed reasonably, but only so far as such an
expectation might hold for usual practice in ordinary social discourse
to which one holds no claim of exclusive rights.