[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
I have to say I am in full agreement with Len on the need to pay
professionals for participation in development projects. Importantly,
there seems to be a misconception among list posters that academics have
no vested interest in developing products; that is far from the case in
my experience.
As both a professional and an academic, with, a considerable vested
interest in the development of XML applications, among other
technologies, for digital heritage archives, libraries, and related
virtual reality simulations of sites, monuments and objects, it is very
frustrating to be in situations where funding shortfalls impede both
real and potential progress in the development of technology
applications- applications that once developed, have potential for use
far beyond the digital heritage domain.
It is fair to say that academics are more directly involved in scholarly
research as that is their primary agenda, and while the majority of
academics are often less directly involved in technology transfer and
industry related product development. However, this is not to say that
significant advances of relevance to industry have not come from
academia, that have direct and important impact upon industry - far from
it, and I don't sense that I need to itemize these things here.
It is important to note that many "products" of such research,
particularly in computer science and information technology, as well as
computer and electrical engineering fields, have direct benefit to
industry and enterprise, and it is equally important to note that many
of the successes are due to financial support of academic research by
both private enterprise and public sector funding at Federal/State/local
levels as well as support from non-profit foundations and organizations.
In short, more attention, especially attention in the form of industry
support, for academic research is essential to insure that technology
continues to advance.
Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>I said pay professsionals, Dare. Some might be
>professional standards people such as are provided
>out of ISO. Our results with these people have
>been excellent. Some are professionals in the
>domain and might even include some 'softies
>if Bad Bill decides to provide. Certainly he
>pays people to participate. Michael Champion,
>for example, Jean Paoli was another.
>
>Attitude matters more than pay but again,
>I think it realistic to expect decent wages
>for hard work.
>
>"Academics"?
>
>len
>
>
>From: Dare Obasanjo [mailto:dareo@microsoft.com]
>
>Professional standards people? The XSD working group was full of them
>and I personally think this is one of the reasons it was a disaster. A
>bunch of academics with no stake in the success of the technology since
>they weren't building products OR did not accurately represent their
>constituency on thew orking group.
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
>initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
>The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
>manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
>
>
>
--
From the desk of James [Jim] E. Landrum III,
Archaeology Materials and Database Manager,
Archaeology Technologies Laboratory (ATL; http://atl.ndsu)
North Dakota State University (NDSU),
Digital Archive Network for Anthropology and World Heritage (DANA-WH; http://dana-wh.net)
Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology (CAA)
CAA2006 Conference, Fargo, North Dakota, USA. http://www.caa2006.org
|
