[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Standards should be all the things
the author of that blog wants, but anything
that clear and that well-ironed out is also
well-implemented and probably through at
least a half-life. Or it is trivial.
Proposing technologies on the other hand,
without experience in the field being
spec'd is only a learning curve and if one
insists on calling them standard to boot,
everyone gets to take the ride with them
even if the train is going nowhere. It's called
"sharing the pain".
In short, people want to be standardizing
while they are still experimenting because
they fear that when the experiment is over,
so is the market, or because they badly need
lots of eyeballs or the experience of others
for whatever reason. One thing I've noticed;
the more people get excited and run to join
the WG, the less chance the work has of getting
done inside a year. Process isn't poison;
people who use process to gain advantages
not otherwise obtainable by technical insight are.
And when one has that insight, process lawyering
is only needed to stop mobs.
As to the HypeMachine, one learns to ignore
it. One adopts personal metrics for figuring
out when a technology train is worth catching.
Usually it is, "how badly to I need that right
now" and maybe "is it implemented in the toolkit
I will be using in production six months from now".
If it gets past those two, it is also possibly
IAW with what the author of the blog is going
on about.
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrzej Jan Taramina [mailto:andrzej@chaeron.com]
> The reality is that the vendors are proposing technologies.
AMEN to that Len! All this talk of "XML standards" by the vendors makes me
sick. The problem is that there are a lot of PHM's out there that take what the
big boys say on face value. <sigh>
|
