Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal

----- Original Message -----
From: Matt Shaver
To: CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@onelist.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2000 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO]EHP External Hardware Proposal


From: "Matt Shaver" <mshaver@...

I'm sorry if I was not clear in what I said originally. my point was that
there wasn't anyone currently _maintaining_ the RS-274 "G Code" standard
(that I know of), and that defacto industry standards* have progressed beyond
the "official" version.

I think you will find that this was the case just as much at the time the standard was published, as now. It was defined with some flexibility for OEM's to develop for example, canned cycles.
One thing I have learned about standards bodies like
ANSI, EIA, and NIST (among others) is that they do not dictate the terms of
standards to force industry into doing things "their way". The purpose of
standards seems to be twofold; First to codify and clarify existing "industry
standards" so that others can create compatible products. Second, in the case
of new technologies where there is no clear "industry standard", standards
are written to promote debate among interested parties, and then revisions
are made until everyone is (reasonably) happy. The main point is that
standards are supposed to be promulgated from the "bottom up", rather than
dictated from the "top down". Who should be in charge of standards? Answer:
End users and product manufacturers!

I think that RS-274 needs to be updated to reflect the current "state of the
art" by surveying all the additions and improvements that various control
manufacturers have adopted, and resolve any conflicts (ie G2846.3 is used by
two companies for different purposes).



I disagree a lot with your rosy view of the standards process. My impression of the standards process is that it is intentionally setup to EXCLUDE all but the moneyed elites, whether they be academe, government, or industry. In no way do ANY of the standards organizations have any but their own self interest at heart. Why does it cost $65.00 for a copy of the G-code standard? This document should be free, given to every student and supplied with every machine. It's ONLY 29 pages. WHY DOES IT COST $65 plus S & H!!!!!!

There is no excuse and I think the standards organizations, the standards committee members, and the entire process is corrupt. The bureaucrats and academics want to perpetuate the process until they retire, the industry participants are paid consultants wages, and don't have to do much work when at committee meetings, and the corporations that actually fund much of the standards process do everything in their power to make sure that their special little twist gets embedded in the standard.

Just look at the IGES standard if you want to see a nightmare. It's such a joke that they know they need a new standard. It's going to be called STEP. It's the unified field theory of CAD-CAM communications. There is so much money and prestige at stake that even the SME has been drawn in and is a major sponsor and promoter. They made a VIDEO TAPE to promote an UNFINISHED STANDARD. There's a LOT of jobs at stake at SME.


Best Regards,

Fred Smith
IMService

imserv@...
Phone: 248-486-3600 or 800-386-1670
Fax:248-486-3698


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]