ACM Stand.最新文献

{"title":"Second-best practices for interoperability","authors":"Martin C. Libicki","doi":"10.1145/230871.230877","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1145/230871.230877","url":null,"abstract":"■ If the GII is to realize its full potential, it will have to support distributed applications among heterogeneous user systems exchanging not only bits, but also mutually understood meanings (nouns and verbs). This requires standards. Yet the best method of generating such standards, through explicit consensus, may simply not work well, or on time. Second-best approaches such as middleware, lexical primitives, or metalanguage need to be considered. he vast world of information technology standards may be characterized by its two largest realms: public communications and private computation. Public communications entails hauling bits (with the requisite level of service, block definition, reliability and security) among entities that may be anonymous to each other. This is the province of the telephone system, the Internet, etc. Private computation is epitomized by the fully functional corporate network maintained by a specified office to support applications using specific and well-understood information definitions. Both realms are characterized by specific standards. Interoperability in public communications is supported by ITU and Internet standards. Portability of applications across heterogeneous architectures is supported by an ad hoc mixture of language standards, data-item standards, operating system standards, and emerging application portability interfaces. Communications tends to get the standards it needs—which it must if public communications is to exist. Computer uses tend to be covered by standards less often, but privately managed computer systems can use hand-crafting and tight management to get over the bumps. Over the next ten years, the formation of a global information infrastructure—the great challenge in information technology—will require a merger of the two realms. That is, public systems will need to find ways of exchanging and interpreting not only bits, but meanings. They will have to find ways of referring to common concepts using, if not identical vocabulary, at least a vocabulary that permits translation. Moreover, they will have to exchange information without the labor-intensive pre-negotiation usually entailed in the construction of private infrastructures. One can already glimpse applications that run over heterogeneous equipments (that is, nodes) operated by heterogeneous owners to transfer and understand information. Network management is an early application, albeit one well-standardized by its origin in telecommunications. More typical in the future may be environmental monitoring. An adequate environmental picture may require the fusing of data from ground sensors, water sensors, airborne laser-fed Second-Best Practices for Interoperability","PeriodicalId":270594,"journal":{"name":"ACM Stand.","volume":"268 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1996-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128633227","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Improving conformance and interoperability testing","authors":"J. Kindrick, J. Sauter, R. Matthews","doi":"10.1145/230871.230883","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1145/230871.230883","url":null,"abstract":"m The increase in distributed applications and the need for information-sharing has led to increased demand for information-exchange standards to define the means by which applications can communicate. Although testing is critical to ensuring interoperable products, it does add time and cost to the development process. This article reviews work in progress on testing for the STEP standard that promises to reduce the cost of developing standards and standards-based products. An investigation of common approaches to test suite development and testing methods leads to some insights on ways to improve the overall process. Development time and cost can actually be reduced by better applying testing methods and tools. oday’s computer software applications are becoming increasingly distributed. Clientserver applications, distributed objectbased systems, World Wide Web applications, and agent systems all require applications that can exchange information. As applications become more distributed, the role of information-exchange standards, which are used to define a means by which two applications can share or exchange information, expands. The accelerating pace of technology change has dramatically increased the need for new standards and for changes in existing ones. It has also led to a demand for lower costs and a quicker delivery to market. Both of these trends place increased pressure on standards bodies to reduce the time and cost of development. A significant series of information-exchange standards, known as STEP (STandard for the Exchange of Product Model Data, officially ISO-10303 [STEP-1 1994]), is being explored and implemented by a number of major vendors. This standard is seen by many as the means by which several tiers of suppliers in various industries can electronically communicate product descriptions and their evolving changes over the product life-cycle. These descriptions may include mechanical, electrical, geometric, material, configuration, design, manufacturing, and analysis data. Early on, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Navy ManTech, CALS, and key prospective users of STEP, who wanted to speed up the progress of STEP products to market, funded activities to develop better methods and tools for conformance and interoperability testing. These testing programs have been active for nearly five years and many of the desired results have been achieved. This article describes the relationship between conformance and interoperability testing, particularly in the context of STEP development. It has become clear during our work that the choice of test method depends greatly on where one is in the product/market life-cycle and on the means and objectives of the developing organizations. The following sections begin with a broader standard-independent perspective, and then, using examples from our current work ✮ F E A T U R E A R T I C L E","PeriodicalId":270594,"journal":{"name":"ACM Stand.","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1996-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130053808","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The structure of IT standardization","authors":"S. Oksala, A. Rutkowski, Michael B. Spring, J. O'Donnell","doi":"10.1145/230871.230873","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1145/230871.230873","url":null,"abstract":"■ We address the question of how best to develop standards for the information technology industry. While it may be possible to generalize our conclusions for other industry groups, the focus here is on the issues faced by the IT industries. arvin Minsky said “Anything that you hear about computers and AI should be ignored, because we’re in the Dark Ages. We’re in the thousand years between no technology and all technology.’’ [Brand 1988, p. 104] While information technology is probably in somewhat better shape than Minsky suggests is the case for AI, it is true that we are in a period of very rapid, and often unpredictable change. Bibliophiles will be familiar with the term “incunabula” as it refers to books produced between 1450 and 1500. The term more generally describes any art or industry in the early stages of development, and information technology can certainly be so described. Developments are both rapid and pervasive, and there are many indications of the rate and extent of change:","PeriodicalId":270594,"journal":{"name":"ACM Stand.","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1996-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128475777","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Standards development for information technology: best practices for the United States","authors":"J. Morell, Selden L. Stewart","doi":"10.1145/230871.230879","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1145/230871.230879","url":null,"abstract":"■ On July 8–9, 1993, a workshop was held, called “Standards Development for Information Technology: Best Practices for the United States.”1 (see the Appendix for participants.) Sponsors were the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the Industrial Technology Institute (ITI), through its Center for Electronic Commerce (CEC). his article synthesizes discussions begun during the workshop and continued afterward among participants and others. To maintain focus, conference deliberations were framed in terms of several assumptions:","PeriodicalId":270594,"journal":{"name":"ACM Stand.","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1996-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126917486","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The IEEE Standards Process Automation System","authors":"J. Iorio","doi":"10.1145/230871.230882","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1145/230871.230882","url":null,"abstract":"m The IEEE’s Standards Process Automation System (SPAsystem TM) is an ongoing project to apply computing and networking technologies to the creation and use of IEEE standards and related information. This project is a rare opportunity to rethink the entire process by which IEEE standards are written and read, free from the assumptions that paper is the sole interchange and distribution medium. EEE standards are written by hundreds of working groups. Some of these volunteers use computers, some do not; some have Internet access, and some do not. Those with computers use a variety of software that reflects the diversity of the computer marketplace, and the IEEE staff who administers the standards process cannot control this input. Staff members work with the groups, shepherd their documents through the process, and edit them. Information flows from author to editor and back again many times. Traditionally, the results of this work would be a book. After publication, the document in some electronic form is fed back to the working group so they can begin the next iteration of the document.","PeriodicalId":270594,"journal":{"name":"ACM Stand.","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1996-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133019390","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Recommendations for the global information highway: a matter of standards","authors":"K. Krechmer","doi":"10.1145/230871.230874","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1145/230871.230874","url":null,"abstract":"Mr. Krechmer is the founding technical editor of Communications Standards Review, Communications Standards Summary (CSS), and Fiber Optic Standards Summary (FOSS) of Palo Alto, California—the only technical journals reporting on standards workin-progress in the Telecom Industry Association and International Telecommunications Union. CSS and FOSS are both TIA authorized publications. He has also been secretary of TR-29, 1990-1995, and a U.S. delegate to ITU-T SG 8, 14, and 15 meetings. Utilizing this broad view of communications standards work, he consults and teaches how this work will affect organizations’ products and services. Clients include France Telecom, NEC, Dialogic, Cirrus Semiconductor, Ascend Communications, Pacific Telesis, and many others.","PeriodicalId":270594,"journal":{"name":"ACM Stand.","volume":"8 5","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1996-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120992626","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"SEMI: the standards-setting organization behind the trade show association","authors":"X. Pucel","doi":"10.1145/230871.230880","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1145/230871.230880","url":null,"abstract":"Today, demands for cost-effective semiconductor manufacturing create a greater need for standards and for a forum where users and suppliers can reach consensus on precompetitive requirements for future generations of equipment and materials. As global competition intensifies, the need to integrate standardization into a company’s business strategy increases. Strategic standardization, effectively managed, can open new markets, increase sales, reduce trade barriers, and e n s u r e a company’s competitiveness and profitability. Because standards profoundly affect a company’s way of establishing business, their development and use must be sustained at the highest executive level. n 1970, several equipment and materials manufacturers for the semiconductor industry founded Semiconductor Equipment and Materials International (SEMI). SEMI is an international not-for-profit association for semiconductor and flat panel display equipment and materials suppliers. SEMI’s primary goal is to help members expand global marketing opportunities and improve access to customers and industry, government, and civic leaders. SEMI’s mission is to help its members achieve their common corporate objectives by providing a means to collectively address semiconductor and related technology industry issues. SEMI pursues this mission by:","PeriodicalId":270594,"journal":{"name":"ACM Stand.","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1996-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127050338","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Technical standards: foundations of the future","authors":"K. Krechmer","doi":"10.1145/230871.230872","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1145/230871.230872","url":null,"abstract":"■ Without the cubit, the pyramids could not have been built. Technical standards are the foundation of each technological advance; each innovation is linked by reference to prior technical standards. Each successful innovation furthers the flow of progress. Most innovations cause only a small ripple in that flow, but a few bring about more profound change, and are perhaps the beginnings of a whole new wave.1 Technical standards are a means to chart these rising waves of change. In this article, three classes of technical standards are identified and the changes they influenced are described. A fourth class of technical standards is postulated and some of its effects are predicted. n early example of a standard is the written alphabets developed by the Egyptians and Babylonians around 4000 BC.2 Thus the setting of a standard marks the start of recorded Western history. The Western alphabet continued to evolve for about 3000 years until the Greeks completed the task with the addition of vowels (and the writing of the Homeric tales).3 Alphabets were so desirable that many other, incompatible, alphabets were also developed in other cultures. The creation of multiple alphabets appears to have been caused by minimal communications between different cultures and the desire of each culture to control its own alphabet. So each culture developed its own standard alphabet, many of which survive today. While the alphabet was being developed so were unit standards for length and volume, setting the stage for the next wave of change, the trading wave. Trading, the major activity of merchants, is facilitated by the acceptance of public standards4 for unit measure. Initially, different cultures created different unit standards. Over time, trading (a form of communication) reduced the number of systems of weight and measures significantly. Waves of human progress, technology, and standards are related and overlapping. As humans and technology do, standards follow an evolutionary path. Multiple standards are created and over time are winnowed down to the most desirable and culturally acceptable standards that codify the technical requirements developed during the preceding wave. Later waves build upon previous technical work by referring to the standards. Even the information wave, first described in 1980, has already evolved sufficiently to suggest further division into linear and adaptive phases. Table One describes the periods most relevant to the creation of new classes of technical standards. It is not meant to describe all the waves of progress that have occurred. Technical Standards: Foundations of the Future","PeriodicalId":270594,"journal":{"name":"ACM Stand.","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1996-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124312646","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Human behavior: another dimension of standards setting","authors":"F. Nielsen","doi":"10.1145/230871.230878","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1145/230871.230878","url":null,"abstract":"m For many reasons, standards development is a tough job. Yet, standards are needed if we are to exploit the full potential of technology to enrich our world. In particular, there is a great need for information technology (IT) standards to nurture the nation’s information infrastructure. After briefly describing the processes used to achieve IT standards, this article focuses on the behavior of participants in those development processes as a dimension of the difficult problem of standards-setting. ithout our being aware of it, standards play a major factor in our everyday lives. Consider a typical work day— we awake to the clock radio, we put on the light, we jump from tousled sheets into a hot shower, we dress, we drive to the office stopping briefly for gas. . . . We are unconscious of the standards that make these activities possible—standards for the appliances we use and the power to run them, standards for lightbulbs and sockets, standards for fitted sheets, standards for water purity, standards for pipes and plumbing, standards for clothing, standards for automobile parts, standards for fuel, and on and on. We do not think about—nor do we want to think about—the standards underlying these activities. And, we do not want to think about how these standards were developed. Yet, standards developers have invested a lot of time and effort to produce standards leading to products, ultimately making life easier for us; and it was a nontrivial challenge achieving those standards.","PeriodicalId":270594,"journal":{"name":"ACM Stand.","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1996-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133602775","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Harnesses and muzzles: greed as engine and threat in the standards process","authors":"Joseph Farrell","doi":"10.1145/230871.230875","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1145/230871.230875","url":null,"abstract":"■ The central lesson of economics is that if we design our institutions right, the pursuit of self-interest leads to good results, not to bad ones. As Adam Smith wrote, “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.” Modern economists have built on Smith’s insight that, when harnessed by well-functioning market institutions, selfishness and greed can lead “as if by an invisible hand” to good outcomes. But as you learned in kindergarten, it’s not always that way: selfishness and greed can also lead to bad results, which is what you’d probably expect. tandards institutions are no exception. They can harness greed, and make it (as Smith would hope) a force for good, or (as your kindergarten teacher would fear) a force for evil. How can standards institutions harness greed and yet muzzle its bad side? Of course, standards participants are not driven purely by greed, as an economist caricature might assume. But the classic answer to the question “What do economists economize?” is “They economize love.” Altruism, public-spiritedness, and even love are out there, but economists suspect it’s better not to rely too heavily on them if instead we can harness the more reliable and enduring force of greed. It’s some kind of greed, in the end, that sends most participants to standards meetings. People attend because they, or their employers, hope to get something out of it. In this sense greed drives the process. As long as standards organizations have to rely on volunteer participation, it’s important that the process provides incentives for people to come and put in the effort. At the same time, strong rewards, if badly structured, can themselves stall the process.","PeriodicalId":270594,"journal":{"name":"ACM Stand.","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1996-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123340511","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}