[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> As I asked Dare, would you agree that if the following
> is asked, a better deal results:
>
> 1. It is ISO standard (which has a specific meaning)
> but created by technical committees from consortia
> (not the marketing guys who go to committee meetings
> to represent their bosses' viewpoint).
No, this does not necessarily make a better deal. I think Robin's
message gave a great deal of information. Here's an example I know
about. DCE was created by a handful of technologists back when OSF
stood for "Oppose Sun Forever." :) Once the initial technology
providers were chosen by OSF and some of their invited consultants, DCE
RPC was created (by Apollo(-->HP) and Digital). OSF provided
technology, and developed specifications so anyone could implement
without licensing the reference source. It worked: because of the legal
frameworks involved at the time, Microsoft didn't buy a license but
implemented from the spec and called it DCOM. It completely
interoperates with DCE RPC.
OSF took the specs and brought them to X/Open. They were put aon a
fast-track process; the primary criteria for fast track, at the time,
was "will you pay X/Open $x/page to handle the editorial work."
From there, X/Open submitted it (through AFNOR, I think) as a
fast-track to ISO.. It quickly became an ISO standard. I don't know if
Corba IIOP/GIOP ever got to ISO. But for many years, perhaps more than
a decade, the only wire-protocol RPC system that's an ISO standard is
DCE RPC.
BFD. :)
> 2. Is Royalty-free by dint of a signed participation
> agreement.
If I'm purchasing, as opposed to implementing, I probably don't care.
Yes, I *might* have fewer vendors to choose from, but in my mind "ISO
standard" equates to "the big boys" anyway. As long as there exists one
vendor that meets my needs, the patent portfolios are an implementation
detail that need not concern me.
> 3. Comes with conformance tests and a test mark (a
> formal variation of a trade mark).
Yes, this is the most important of your three criteria. In my very
limited experiences, X/Open (now The Open Group) were among the most
comprehensive branding/conformance in this area, although the Windows
and Novell logo/branding programs are good.
/r$
--
Rich Salz, Chief Security Architect
DataPower Technology http://www.datapower.com
XS40 XML Security Gateway http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html
XML Security Overview http://www.datapower.com/xmldev/xmlsecurity.html
|
