[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Ken North wrote:
> Although I'm not Len, here are some ISO standards that people in computing
> have encountered over the years:
>
> Characters sets and coding (ASCII, OCR-A, OCR-B, MICR, bar codes)
> Audio and video compression (MPEG 1, 2, 4)
> Graphics: GKS, PHIGS, CGM, JBIG
> Messaging/mail: X.400
> Languages: C, C++, Ada, SQL, FORTRAN, COBOL, Pascal, Modula-2, POSIX, CLI
> Storage, networking, bus interfaces: SCSI, SCSI-2, FDDI, CSMA/CD, VMEbus,
> Multibus, HIPPI, RS-232/V.24 electrical
> Markup: SGML, RELAX NG, VRML
> Geocoding: ISO 19100 (19107, 19108, 19123, 19127)
>
> In general, ISO, IEC and ITU (formerly CCITT) collaborate on a variety of
> standards -- (e.g., ISO/IEC 7498 Open Systems Interconnect). There are also
> standards for things such as how many dead pixels are acceptable in LCDs.
Thanks for the list, Ken -- it should provide a reasonable basis for
comparision with computer tech specs that have come out of processes other
than ISO's and ANSI's. Some of these I would disregard, either because they
have not caught on (i.e. the graphics formats), or because they are
primarily rubber-stamps on existing, outside work (such as RelaxNG or VRML);
however, some represent real, from scratch work (such as SGML) or
substantive, widely-accepted modifications to existing specs (such as SQL92
or ANSI C and C++).
Now, any discussion comparing various standards and specification bodies
needs to show how, for example, the ISO process has caused, say, ANSI C++ to
be a fairer, cleaner, more widely-implemented, less vendor-bound, freer,
and/or less bug-ridden spec than non-ISO specs like XML or HTTP.
All the best,
David
|
