From rinehuls@access.digex.net Sat May 4 00:05:06 1996 Received: from access2.digex.net (qlrhmEbBUV1EY@access2.digex.net [205.197.245.193]) by dkuug.dk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA26747 for ; Sat, 4 May 1996 00:05:02 +0200 Received: from localhost (rinehuls@localhost) by access2.digex.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA07017 ; for ; Fri, 3 May 1996 18:04:48 -0400 Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 18:04:47 -0400 (EDT) From: "william c. rinehuls" X-Sender: rinehuls@access2.digex.net To: sc22docs@dkuug.dk Subject: SC22 N2135 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22 Programming languages, their environments and system software interfaces Secretariat: U.S.A. (ANSI) ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22 N2135 May 1996 TITLE: The User/Consumer Manifesto SOURCE: Secretariat, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22 WORK ITEM: N/A STATUS: N/A CROSS REFERENCE: N/A DOCUMENT TYPE: N/A ACTION: To SC22 Member Bodies and Working Group Con- veners for action or information as applicable. SC22 Member Bodies and Working Group Conveners with comments specifically related to the work of SC22 are encouraged to submit these comments to Mr. Robert Follett, SC22 Chairman, NOT LATER THAN APRIL 30, 1996 for forwarding. SC22 Member Bodies comments not specifically related to the work of SC22 should be submitted through their respective National Body. Address reply to: ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22 Secretariat William C. Rinehuls 8457 Rushing Creek Court Springfield, VA 22153 USA Tel: +1 (703) 912-9680 Fax: +1 (703) 912-2973 email: rinehuls@access.digex.net _____________________________________________________________________________ Date: Thu, 02 May 96 11:24:00 edt From: LISA RAJCHEL Subject: Australia's Homework Assignment, JTC 1 N 4094 Attached please find document JTC 1 N 4094, Australian Contribution on JTC 1 Reengineering addressing the THE USER/CONSUMER MANIFESTO. National Body and SC contributions are requested on this document by 7 June 1996. PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS VIS EMAIL OR DISK SO THAT THEY MAY BE DISTRIBUTED VIA EMAIL. This document is also being sent via facsimile in order to ensure that it reaches everyone __________________________________________________________________ ISO/IEC JTC 1 N 4094 Title: THE USER/CONSUMER MANIFESTO Source: National Body of Australia Action: National Body and SC contributions are requested on this document by 7 June 1996 PREAMBLE This document has arisen from a perceived need identified at the ISO/IEC/ITU GII Seminar in January 1996 and is being developed to provide a voice for users and consumers wherever standards activity takes place. 1. OBJECTIVE This manisfesto has a number of objectives which are aimed at assisting the creators of standards where user/consumer input to the process is limited or non-existent. Basically, it is a check list of aspects which are likely to be of concern to a user/consumer and against which standards documents should be checked and tested as standards are produced. Where the standards writing process is fortunate enough to have direct user consumer input, this document should still provide useful guidance to ensure all appropriate aspects are considered. 2. DEFINITIONS Up till this stage the terms user and consumer have been used as though they are synonymous. There is need to discriminate and throughout this document, the terms will be used as follows: User: A person or organisation which uses a standard for the creation of products or services. It also includes consumers with sufficient technical expertise to understand the full technical details of the standard. (This would include manufacturers, product developers and regulators. It also appears that it should include consumers from organisations with in-depth technical expertise.) Consumer A consumer is a person or organisation which uses the products which are created in accordance with a standard or group of standards. (In the GII context this was read to cover end consumers as well as service and content providers.) The above definitions also allow for a continuum of consumers, from those with a full understanding of the ramifications of the standards through to those product users who have no understanding of the operation of the underlying equipment or services 3. THE STANDARDS PROCESS Briefly, the consensus standards process requires the participation of all stakeholders if it is to have credibility and validity in the eyes of any group which might be excluded from the process. In the present time, the standards process is very demanding and expensive in terms of people as well as cash. Accordingly, many groups are excluded from the standards process by resource constraints, not only economic, but more importantly, a lack of skilled people who can attend meetings, understand the often complex and abstruse concepts involved and ensure the user and consumer points of view are properly presented and defended. While standards bodies have sought for ways in which to resolve this dilemma, it appears that it has had limited success. Thus this document, while containing many user/consumer concerns only in a generic format may help standards development groups to test that their considerations do comply with the points raised. It is hoped this document becomes a check list which will provide timely reminders to groups without direct user/consumer input. It is envisaged that in certain cases, points which are listed here may not be considered applicable. However, the review to ensure that this is indeed true will ensure that vital points elsewhere in the list are not overlooked. 4. USER REQUIREMENTS Users have in recent times raised a number of concerns about the standards process and these are contained in the following points. 4.1 Global standards, not just international, regional, national or set by a small consortium Standards need to be developed in a truly global sense. There is a strong feeling that they should be developed in an environment which encompasses all industry sectors and consortia as well as regional, national and narrowly focussed international interests. 4.2 Use a systems approach, Standardise building blocks not solutions Too many standards appear to set out to solve a specific problem rather than being part of the necessary elements of a generally applicable solution. 4.3 Develop standards for key interfaces In many instances, the development of standards for interfaces which permit a range of options on either side is a solution which provides maximum commercial flexibility and an ability to accommodate developments 4.4 Maximum use of existing standards There are many standards in existence and solutions based on their use or enhancement reduce the costs and delays of standards development as well as permitting a shortening of product development times. 4.5 Commercial objectivity and relevance. There is need to ensure that standards under development are for potentially commercially viable products or services. There are pressures for rapid delivery of the necessary standards as well as a need for occasional review to confirm that the project is still relevant. Standards developers should not be afraid to suspend work on projects which are no longer required. 4.6 Need to coordinate industry sectors requiring similar products It has happened that a number of sectors have developed independent and incompatible solutions to similar problems. This adds to the ultimate difficulties of merging the various problems as well as dissipating scarce resources on two solutions to the same problem. Again this indicates why global standards are necessary. 4.7 Continual demonstration of feasibility This point is raised to promote the development of test beds and prototypes so that the ultimate standard provides a practical solution which will allow for realistic products. 4.8 Availability of details of work in progress In order to avoid duplication of effort and to maximise the use of standards development resources, a global database of work in progress should be available. This does not need to be centralised as an X.500 or WWW solution could provide for a distributed solution. There would be need to standardise the details which should be available to allow for search consistency. 4.9 Simple access to finished standards While expressed as a desire for free access to finished standards it is likely that simple, low cost access to the standards on some form of electronic server is likely to be quite acceptable. Such a compromise would provide the information without destroying the income base of the standards development organisations. 4.10 Limited choices In many instances, for many reasons, standards have contained too many choices. In future, where such a situation occurs there may be need to have a rethink about the direction of the project or to work more intently to reduce the number of standardised options. This is particularly important if we are to move to global standards. Often, the compromise of multiple choices has been adopted to accommodate divergent points of view from different sectors. 4.11 IPR considerations settled A number of standards involve the use of copyrighted or patented techniques and technologies. It is to be hoped that the owners of this intellectual property can assist in the standards process by allowing the use of such property either freely or at low costs so its use is not an inhibitor to progress either of standards or product development. 4.12 Preference for interoperability testing While both conformance and interoperability testing will be necessary, it is proposed that a supplier should only have to demonstrate interoperability. The requirements for conformance will be inherent in this and conformance testing will be an essential component of the product development process. However, it may be a less formal process and, as such, would not be suitable for a formal demonstration of conformance with the standard.. 4.13 Identify demonstrable conformance requirements for key elements. During the development of a standard it is likely that certain characteristics can be identified as essential elements for which products must demonstrate conformity. In line with the point above, these could be tested in an interoperability test. 4.14 Mutual recognition of test results. Considering the similarities of power systems and communications networks in the different countries comprising the world community, it is incredible that testing certification for more than one country needs to be obtained. There is an urgent need for world regulators to recognise that a single test regimen in a single country provides adequate evidence that the product will be safe in most other countries. Considering the consensus which has been achieved in standardization, it is incredible that the progress of mutual recognition of test results has been so slow. 4.15 Options for suppliers self declaration Many suppliers have a well documented and audited quality systems and properly certified laboratories meaning that their test results are credible and their records can be checked if necessary. If appropriate provisions are made in the international trade arena, it should be possible to accept a declaration from such a supplier that the products comply with the requirements of a particular standard or suite of standards and have such declaration accepted in all countries subscribing to international standards. 4.16 Timeliness While the difficulties of developing standards using volunteer labour are recognised, there is need to try and eliminate the unnecessary delays and to deliver the standards in a timely manner. 5. CONSUMER REQUIREMENTS 5.1 Functionality of solution This actually covers two aspects of standardization. i. The first is the need to ensure the standard addresses the problems actually faced by consumers. One suggested method of determining how this aspect might be satisfied could be to capture the way in which the user will specify and use the products made to the standard. ii. The second aspect is whether the standard is addressing a problem which consumers actually have. While this may be difficult to determine in new areas of technology and delays caused in ensuring that it is actually required may conflict with the need to effect a timely delivery, it is nonetheless important that this aspect should be checked. The standards organisations need to have the fortitude to discontinue work which appears to be no longer needed by consumers. 5.2 Ease of use Again impossible to mandate but to urge standards writers to bear in mind. Mindful of the fact that most of the clocks in the world s VCRs flash because the are not easy to set, it would appear that there should be a standard which makes the setting of such devices uniform and potentially intuitive. 5.3 Security Many users of electronic services are concerned about the security of any information they might send or receive and security about the details of their activities on electronic networks. Standards should address this issue and endeavour to provide means whereby security can be protected 5.4 Privacy Media attention has ensured that most consumers are aware of the possibilities of invasions of privacy from connections to the wider electronic networks. Recognising such concerns, standards should be written to recognise that there is need for privacy safeguards. 5.5 Reliability and quality of service While it is impossible to mandate reliability and quality of service, it may be possible to include indications of levels of reliability and QOS which might satisfy various situations. It may be possible to define several levels which would allow consumers to select the one which satisfies their needs or commercial requirements. 5.6 Advice of information on aspects such as costs While most services on the Internet are currently free, a stage will arise where charges for services will be made. Concern was expressed that such charging should not commence until the consumer has received notice of the charge and has acted to indicate that this charge is accepted. 5.7 Protection of rights of ownership in IP. There is urgent need to provide mechanisms for protecting the rights of owners of creative material. It appears that this will have to involve technical mechanisms, since it is unlikely that legal deterrents will have any effect. 5.8 Need to consider multi-cultural and multi-lingual aspects Much of the work on standards is based on the requirements of western style consumers whose background is based on European culture. Wider consideration needs to be given to the needs of other consumers. 5.9 Requirements of other groups with special needs eg physically disabled, hearing and sight impaired, economically disadvantaged Standards tend to be written for able bodied consumers with generally little consideration for the physically, geographically, economically and intellectually handicapped consumers. 5.10 Need for consumer education about standards While there are many things to learn about in elementary education, an appreciation of the value of standards in society would assist in providing a pool of educated consumers who, in time, would become significant contributors to the development of standards. 5.11 Availability of standards and information about them. One of the first benefits of the GII should be its ability to deliver standards and information about their development to anyone who wants the information. Distributed database technologies represented by the World Wide Web or X.500, would mean that information only needs to be stored once and can then be made available to all enquirers simply. Thus information about work in progress, who is doing it and its progress can be provided relatively simply. As to whether the final product will be available free in its electronic form is a question causing considerable angst amongst standards writing bodies. As a considerable portion of their funding comes from the sale of these documents, they will need to be assured of alternative sources of income in order that they can continue to carry out their duties. 6. SUCCESS FACTORS By developing a check list of items which are of concern to them, users and consumers can keep standards development committees informed of their requirements in a generic manner. If the information requirements stated in the manifesto are met, they would then have the information to assist them to decide which projects might need further attention. The check list, while remaining fairly generic, could be made more specific for any project where a need was seen. Further, like any standards document, it is subject to review for enhancement as necessary. By this means, a user and consumer presence could be maintained in all standards committees. Even where user and consumer representatives are involved, it can still serve a useful purpose to ensure that all concerns have been addressed. Finally, it should be borne in mind that for the majority of standards, most members of the standards committee will themselves be end consumers of the products for which they are developing standards.