The BBC has published an article about the long, slow birth of DAB radio which can be summarized as follows:

• Currently, the British government is pushing hard for listeners to switch to Digital radio and specifically the DAB standard. While DAB is heralded as the ‘technology of the future’, few know that it is really ‘the technology of the past’ since it is about 30 years old. While the first development began in 1981, the first receivers were available only in 1999 and it is only ten years after that (2010) that there is some real commercial interest in DAB.

•
Read More…

Transparency is certainly one of the main attributes of European Standardisation. CEN and CENELEC, and their national members (31 countries) constantly work to ensure maximum transparency at all stages in the development of European Standards.

Read More…

In the discussion about appropriate eligibility criteria under a modernized EU standardization policy, it should be considered to what extent the requirements that in many cases already apply under competition law would safeguard the public policy interests at stake.

EU competition policy supports the notion that industry standardization should be open, transparent and non-discriminatory. The Commission’s new draft guidelines on horizontal cooperation outlines requirements (including participation, transparent procedures and IPR-regimes with clear disclosure and licensing rules) under which cooperation on standards generally would not result in restrictions of competition (and thus would not run afoul of the antitrust rules). Such a “safe-harbor” approach is particularly appropriate for formal SSOs and other standards bodies with significant industry participation, since they affect the conditions for market access and competition both at the technology level and for the standardized products.

Similarly, where governments act as regulators or procurers, their involvement may increase the market ubiquity of a given standard. Relying on open and transparent standards in such situations can ensure a level playing field and full implementation of the standard, and avoid vendor lock-in.

However, too far-reaching regulatory requirements may stifle development. The success and increased importance of various fora and consortia show that different governance and organization models may be appropriate and efficient. Moreover, important “non-formal” SSOs (e.g. in the ICT-sector) display a high degree of openness and transparency, and an ability to protect themselves from vested interests, despite “non-conventional” structures.

IEEE has announced the availability of IEEE P1547.8 standard which is a draft standard establishing a common technical platform for distributed resources interconnection applications.

IEEE P1547.8 expands on IEEE 1547 and also incorporates National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) recommendations for improved interconnection performance functionality

Read More…

I have always liked O Reilly publications for their pragmatic approach to technical issues. Hence, its great to see a brief yet insightful article posted on the O Reilly tech community called “Toward a Saner Standards Process” – see here.

Read More…

Standardisation has the potential to be an influential instrument in improving China’s economy, society and government in numerous dimensions, so long as standardisation policy is able to be effectively embedded in both other related policy areas at the national level and the international system of standardisation.

Read More…

With the soccer World Cup kicking off last week in South Africa, it is interesting to consider the effects that standardization has played in spreading the popularity of the game internationally.

Modern soccer stems from mid 19^th century efforts to standardize the rules of various codes of football played throughout English public schools during the era.
Read More…

In April, Talkstandards.com hosted an open forum on the topic of formal review/ranking of Standard Setting Organisations (SSO). Contributors were asked to discuss whether such review/ranking of SSOs would foster or impede efficient standardization?

Ajit Jaokar argued that any “standards for standards” effort risked the creation of a “class system between consortia” based on an arbitrary set of criteria and will only be more difficult to apply as new innovation becomes increasingly cross-domain (e-health, Mobile health, etc).

Helen Disney, arguing that the priority of an SSO should be promotion of both competition and innovation, identified the criticism that formal review creates more bureaucracy within the standard setting organisations and as such may slow change in dynamic markets such as the IT sector.
Read More…

The title of this blog is a play on the famous words by the pioneering computer scientist Alan Kay who said that: “The best way to predict the future is to invent it”. In contrast, the ‘Standards for standards’ approach seems to take the view that: The best way to predict the future is to standardize it. In other words, it seems to predict future directions for innovation and preemptively create a standards template for future innovation.

This approach will not work for a number of reasons, but in this post I will focus on two specific issues:
Read More…

The British Standards Institution (BSI) announced in a 2009 press release in a that work had begun to formulate the PAS 98 “Code of practice for the establishment and management of Consortia”, a good practice guide. The code is to be internationally applicable and provide support for consortia in e.g. standards development and interoperability.
Read More…