1 / 6

W3C’s Relationship to de jure Standards

This article explores the relationship between de jure and de facto standards, highlighting the role of market traction in driving adoption. It examines the challenges faced by sanctioned, open standards and emphasizes the need for a smart approach that combines technology work at the consortia level with pursuit of further sanctioning at the de jure level. The article also discusses the evolution of W3C's relationship with ISO and the emergence of new consortiums like JTC-1.SC38.

martinezmaria
Download Presentation

W3C’s Relationship to de jure Standards

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. W3C’s Relationship to de jure Standards Steve Holbrook (IBM)

  2. Sanction vs Traction • Open Process & Sanctioning helps • but there are LOTS of sanctioned, open standards out there (both in W3C and ISO) …with no up-take! • Market traction matters • Vendors react to market pressure • Customer demand & competition • Ability to make money • Government Regulations * (I’ll come back to this…) • … in the end: de facto matters more than de jure

  3. W3C in the Middle New Kids New Old(?) School Old School microFormats W3C ISO/IEC/ITU Sanction & Ratify Innovate

  4. IBM’s (and others’?) Ideal Model • We’re all resource constrained • Need a smart approach • Do technology work once @ consortia level • Await traction in market • Pursue further sanctioning @ de jure level

  5. 2004 vs 2010? • ISO/IEC JTC-1 Web Services Study Group (WSSG) started in 2003 • Don Deutsch (chair) presentend on WSSG in May 2004 AC • 2004: Advisory Board “advised” W3C become a PAS Submitter • Team: “thanks, but no thanks” (Mike will address) • We’ll achieve int’l recognition in other ways • Other SDOs? (Eduardo will address OASIS) • OASIS was already a PAS Submitter, WS-I became one • 2010: voices again calling for W3C to be a PAS Submitter • What changed?

  6. China & others • Struggling to fit in w/ W3C & Consortia • Prefer Top-down • Identify ideal framework & fill in holes in Int’l Stds • Caused creation of JTC-1 SC38 • Web Service WG • SOA WG • Cloud Computing Study Group

More Related