Re: [RFC] Restructuring of the Debian Project

[bruce@pixar.com (Bruce Perens)]

Bruce:
> 1. They are available in digitial form (probably HTML) on the net,
> for free.

From: kai@khms.westfalen.de (Kai Henningsen)
> Actually, these days, POSIX and similar standards are usually available  
> for free as long as they are in draft stage. You just have to find them.

Indeed. However, I'd like to have freely available standards, not freely
available drafts.

Bruce:
> 2. They come with GPL-ed validation suite software.

Kai:
> Write some.

I will. Along with the standard. I'd prefer not to write
free software for a standard that is itself not free.

Bruce:
> 3. You self-certify by running the validation suite and posting results.
> 4. Any end-user can check you out for fraud by re-running validation.

Kai:
> If you have 2, this automatically follows. You just change "meets IEEE  
> xxx" to "passes the bla suite" to be on firm legal grounds.

I'd rather say "OSO-10 certified (open standards organization), and give
a URL for the certification report.

Bruce:
> 5. No big expensive committees flying around and having meetings at
>    posh resorts. Thus, no need to make money for the standard.

Kai:
> I don't know of *any* standard that works that way. Really, where do you  
> get those ideas?

We used to participate in the HPPI standard, and it worked that way.
ANSI language committees seem to meet in interesting venues, as well.

Kai:
> Usually, committee members get paid by their employers, and those  
> employers pay for them flying around; the standards organization only pay  
> for the bureaucracy. That, and printing, is what they want the money for.

I'll accept that. Assume that free software organizations can't pay for
flying around as much as employers can. We need a standards organization
that will accomodate then. Well, cut out the bureaucracy and the printing
so that the standard can be free.

> Incidentally, there's ECMA, who publishes their stuff for free. That may  
> be because ECMA is the European Computer Manufacturers Association - that  
> is, their members are used to paying for standards creation, not to  
> charging for standards distribution.

Yes. Indeed they sent me _their_version_ of the ANSI terminal standard
via international air-mail when I requested it. They spent 3 or 4 bucks
to do so. They could have saved the money and put the document up for
electronic retrieval, but I doubt their license from ANSI would allow
them to do that.

Kai:
> And I gather all the computer standards committees would much rather have  
> the standards available for free, too. Or at least for reasonable prices  
> (like other computer books, that is).

The problem is they currently don't have any standards organization
_other_than_IETF_ that works that way. I think IETF is one of the most
successful standards organizations ever (otherwise the Internet would not
work), just because it works with little bureaucracy.

> This may, or may not work; however, I don't think it would be wise to
> have  standards that conflict with what the rest of the industry uses.

No, I would expect the free standards to be supersets rather than to
conflict with things like POSIX. They could be designed while consulting
the other standards, however we would have to write a new standard rather
than plagiarize and old one word-for-word.

	Thanks

	Bruce
--
Bruce Perens K6BP   Bruce@Pixar.com   510-215-3502
Finger bruce@master.Debian.org for PGP public key.
PGP fingerprint = 88 6A 15 D0 65 D4 A3 A6  1F 89 6A 76 95 24 87 B3