Comments on: Importance of Standards http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2008/01/17/importance-of-standards/ Sat, 11 Feb 2012 23:41:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: pd http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2008/01/17/importance-of-standards/comment-page-1/#comment-589 pd Tue, 22 Jan 2008 23:57:56 +0000 http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/?p=186#comment-589 I think it's high time to go over Microsoft's head, legal style. As indirectly suggested at JustBrowsing, it's time for web standards to be destroyed in that for some unknown reason web standards are a non-law unto themselves. Unlike every other industry out there, why are web standards incredibly insular? To take the web further, it's time to make web standardisation legally binding. Take HTML5 to the International Standards Organisation. Get it approved in whatever form is necessary - who cares if it's decrepit? The process is the important thing. Establish an ISO standard and vendors will be legally obliged to conform. Once this modus operandi is established and accepted, iterate the ISO standard towards something technically pure. I think it’s high time to go over Microsoft’s head, legal style. As indirectly suggested at JustBrowsing, it’s time for web standards to be destroyed in that for some unknown reason web standards are a non-law unto themselves.

Unlike every other industry out there, why are web standards incredibly insular?

To take the web further, it’s time to make web standardisation legally binding.

Take HTML5 to the International Standards Organisation. Get it approved in whatever form is necessary – who cares if it’s decrepit? The process is the important thing. Establish an ISO standard and vendors will be legally obliged to conform. Once this modus operandi is established and accepted, iterate the ISO standard towards something technically pure.

]]> By: Iang (How to improve the Standards Processs.) http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2008/01/17/importance-of-standards/comment-page-1/#comment-588 Iang (How to improve the Standards Processs.) Sun, 20 Jan 2008 11:43:54 +0000 http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/?p=186#comment-588 Tough question. The starting point is the economics of standards, which is prisoner's dilemma, which leads to how to break the payoffs. More on the blog. Tough question. The starting point is the economics of standards, which is prisoner’s dilemma, which leads to how to break the payoffs. More on the blog.

]]> By: Ant Bryan http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2008/01/17/importance-of-standards/comment-page-1/#comment-587 Ant Bryan Fri, 18 Jan 2008 21:40:24 +0000 http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/?p=186#comment-587 I'd like to invite Mozilla and anyone else interested to participate in the continual development of the Metalink standard at http://www.metalinker.org/ . Metalink isn't specifically a web standard, but is more concerned with downloads in general, describing them, automating download processes which were manual, and making transfers more reliable and fault tolerant. Most download managers, and some Web browsers, FTP, & P2P clients already support Metalink. Please, come join the fun! I’d like to invite Mozilla and anyone else interested to participate in the continual development of the Metalink standard at http://www.metalinker.org/ . Metalink isn’t specifically a web standard, but is more concerned with downloads in general, describing them, automating download processes which were manual, and making transfers more reliable and fault tolerant. Most download managers, and some Web browsers, FTP, & P2P clients already support Metalink. Please, come join the fun!

]]> By: Daniel Glazman http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2008/01/17/importance-of-standards/comment-page-1/#comment-586 Daniel Glazman Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:30:19 +0000 http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/?p=186#comment-586 Designing a standard is not like writing code. When you write code, you can see rapidly if it works or not. When you write a standard like a web standard, you have to think about implementability, process, priorities, time to market, and so many things that most "external" contributors cannot in fact really contribute without a tight control. Because a spec is a document - and not code -, some people think it's only a matter of giving ideas and writing text. It's not. It's FAR more complex than that and the learning curve is steeper than most people think. The place where a standard is designed - call that a standards body even if the process is informal - is a battlefield. Always. Some people don't get it, will never get it. The openess of standardization is a dangerous process, and I perfectly measure the importance of the words I am using. From my perspective, and because of the problems exposed above, the standardization of HTML5 for instance is not a success. Technical knowledge is not the only factor turning a skilled programmer into a standard designer. Diplomacy is also needed. Innovation is also needed. Product process knowledge is also needed. Knowledge of the industry is needed. Feedback is one thing ; contribution is another one. I have tons of examples where "web developers" don't understand at all what it means to standardize HTML or CSS. Their feedback or "contribution" was then counter-productive. I also know this because when I joined myself IETF mailing-lists and later W3C, I was myself young, impatient and rough. Took me a while to understand the "rules" of standardization, how difficult the gestation of a process is. Mea culpa, for sure. Designing a standard is not like writing code. When you write code, you can see rapidly if it works or not. When you write a standard like a web standard, you have to think about implementability, process, priorities, time to market, and so many things that most “external” contributors cannot in fact really contribute without a tight control. Because a spec is a document – and not code -, some people think it’s only a matter of giving ideas and writing text. It’s not. It’s FAR more complex than that and the learning curve is steeper than most people think.
The place where a standard is designed – call that a standards body even if the process is informal – is a battlefield. Always. Some people don’t get it, will never get it.
The openess of standardization is a dangerous process, and I perfectly measure the importance of the words I am using. From my perspective, and because of the problems exposed above, the standardization of HTML5 for instance is not a success.
Technical knowledge is not the only factor turning a skilled programmer into a standard designer. Diplomacy is also needed. Innovation is also needed. Product process knowledge is also needed. Knowledge of the industry is needed.
Feedback is one thing ; contribution is another one. I have tons of examples where “web developers” don’t understand at all what it means to standardize HTML or CSS. Their feedback or “contribution” was then counter-productive.
I also know this because when I joined myself IETF mailing-lists and later W3C, I was myself young, impatient and rough. Took me a while to understand the “rules” of standardization, how difficult the gestation of a process is. Mea culpa, for sure.

]]>