Re: EHP External Hardware Proposal

*****

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

*****
-----
From: "Fred Smith" <imserv@...>

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.
-----

1. Global Engineering Documents is the company that charges the outrageous
fees for copies of various standards. When I first got involved with CNC
software I wanted a copy of the G-code standard. I didn't really know what it
was called, so I ordered RS-358 (its title sounded the most promising). It
turned out to be a one page document on paper tape data formatting, it was
$25! I was furious (I'm still furious)! I would have paid $2, or even $5, but
$25 for ONE (1) page! I don't know what to say...

2. The description I gave of the standards making process is how it was
described to me. I've never been a participant in any of these activities, so
I don't have first hand knowledge of how well reality coincides with theory.
If things are as you say (and I haven't any reason to doubt you), then I'm
disappointed (kind of like a little kid who looks up Santa Claus in the
encyclopedia). I think the best standards are those that simply codify
existing practice. Examples of this are the C programming language, the ISA
bus, and 8-1/2" x 11" notebook paper.

3. With regard to IGES and STEP, I've often joked with their proponents that
any standard that need a preservation society is definitely in trouble (I
think you'll like this site, but you'll need to read between the lines...):

http://www.iges5x.org/

Matt