[thelist] Re: Why code for standards

[Bev Corwin]

My comments follow:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Haenel" <bill at webmarketingworx.com>
To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 11:39 AM
Subject: RE: [thelist] Re: Why code for standards


> > I do not, however, have any trust
> > that the current standards organizations have any concern or interests
in
> > the small business, educational organizations or professional
contractors.
> > In fact,  most of the current standards organizations are seated with
only
> > members from larger corporations.
> > Sincerely,
> > Bev
>
> I understand what you're saying, and I understand why. However, if the
> standard itself is written by say, the W3C, and the directive to maintain
it
> is held by say, ISO or ASTM or some such previously existing entity, this
> can be really functional for everyone.
>
> I just read the W3C membership eligibility requirements and fees
> (http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Prospectus/Joining#classes), and the cost to
> small businesses, NFP's and such is fully 90% less than everyone else, and
> in their words, "There are no differences in Member benefits between the
two
> classes of membership." You can get the lesser membership if you gross
less
> than $US 50,000,000 annually.

The lesser membership is $5000 / year, right?  I believe that alone is
restrictive and out of the reach of most small businesses, contractors,
educators, etc.

>
> Now, take that entity (W3C) as a professional org that writes meaningful
> standards and mix it with one that maintains and monitors compliance, and
> you have a winning combination. The example that floated through here
> yesterday (http://www.cs.tcd.ie/15445/15445.html) was very inspiring to me
> because it did just that. The problem with it is that nobody HAS to follow
> it.
>
> BH

All good points, well taken.   Yes, its a good mix,  but there is still room
for improvement.

Cheers,
Bev