Subject: SC22 N2148

From: "william c. rinehuls" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 May 1996 15:30:26 -0400 (EDT)

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22
Programming languages, their environments and system software interfaces
Secretariat:  U.S.A.  (ANSI)

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22

N2148

May 1996

TITLE:            JTC 1 Products and Services

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 Conveners 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 MAY 30, 1996
                  for forwarding.  SC22 Member Body comments not
                  specifically related to the work of SC22 should be
                  submitted through their respective National Body.

(NOTE:            The invitation to submit comments must be restricted
                  to participants in the email distribution of this
                  document.  Because of the limited time available
                  for responding to the JTC 1 request, participants who
                  receive paper copies of this document will be 
                  requested to submit their comments through their
                  respective National Body whether or not the comments
                  are specifically related to SC22 issues.)

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:  [email-masked]
____________________________________________________________________________                  
From: LISA RAJCHEL <[email-masked]>

Subject: US's Homework Assignment

Attached please find document JTC 1 N 4097, USA Contribution on JTC 1 
Reengineering addressing JTC 1 Products and Services.

National Body and SC contributions are requested on this document by 7 June 
1996.  PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS VIA EMAIL OR DISK SO THAT THEY MAY BE 
DISTRIBUTED VIA EMAIL.

[[ USCONTIB.TXT : 3382 in USCONTIB.TXT ]]
____________________________________________________________________________  

ISO/IEC JTC 1 N 4097

US Contribution - Reengineering Activity
JTC 1 Products and Services

This contribution is the initial US National Body response to the assignment 
from the JTC 1 Sydney Plenary meeting.  It addressesJTC 1 Products and 
Services, and suggests how these might evolve as a result of the 
re-engineering process.  The processes used by JTC 1 are
also considered, and proposals to adapt these to today's environment are 
offered.

The US also considered the Initial List of Goals and Objectives developed at 
the Sydney Plenary, and has prepared a revised list,  intended to stimulate 
additional discussion, and subsequent approval by JTC 1.

Finally, the US believes it is important for JTC 1 to have a clearly 
articulated Scope and Mission statement, which are supportive of JTC 1's 
goals and objectives.

JTC 1 Goals and Objectives

The US believes JTC 1 must agree on goals and objectives as an essential 
element of the reengineering activity. The US recognizes the Initial List of 
Goals and Objectives, as contained in Attachment 1 of JTC 1 N 4058, 
 Resolutions of the Sydney Plenary. is a result of a "brainstorming" session 
during the reengineering ad hoc meeting.  The US notes many items
on the initial list are inter-related, and suggests additional discussion of 
the goals and objectives may improve their clarity.  To this end, the US has 
reviewed the sixteen goals and objectives put forward in Sydney.  They have 
been organized into five basic categories, which are stated as follows:

(1) JTC 1 standards development should be conducted with full attention to a 
strong business-like approach (e.g., cost effective, short development 
times, market-oriented results).
    (1, 2b, 10, 11b, 13)

(2) The JTC 1 community should actively promote its products and services 
(and the benefits of using IS) such that "customers" are attracted to both 
the development of standards and their timely implementation in the form of 
useful products on a worldwide basis.
    (4, 7, 11a, 14)

(3) JTC 1 products and services, as well as the functioning of the 
organization itself, must be of sufficiently high quality and within its 
scope and mission.
    (5, 16)

(4) JTC 1 should provide a wide range of products and services that cover a 
wide spectrum of needs and that apply to all countries on a global basis.
   (3, 8, 9)

(5) JTC 1 should ensure that user needs are fully met, such that its 
products and services promote international trade through their use.
   (2a, 6, 15)

The numbers in parentheses following each category refer to the sixteen 
points in the Initial List of Goals and Objectives.  It is intended the 
essence of all the original statements be captured in the above five 
categories.

JTC 1 Scope and Mission

The following Proposed Scope and Mission Statements are offered for JTC 1 
discussion and comment.  These statements can be important vehicles to both 
guide JTC 1 in the future, as well as communicate what JTC 1 is to the world 
wide IT community.

Proposed Scope Statement

International standardization in the field of information technology which 
encompasses the processing, transfer, display,  management, organization, 
storage and retrieval of information.

Proposed Mission Statement

JTC 1's mission is to:

   * Develop and  maintain information technology standards, and promote and 
facilitate their    use

   * Provide an efficient process for the development of international 
standards.

Strategy for Products and Services

JTC 1 should capitalize on its strengths and use the existing structure to 
create value for its customers.  Strengths that can be identified are either 
technology based (e.g. information encoding, database,  languages, storage) 
or process based (e.g., National Body representation,
international industrial involvement, fiscal resources).  Many of these 
activities set the foundation for value-added services which JTC 1 can offer 
to the global standards community.

To remain viable and competitive in the future, JTC 1 will need to be more 
discerning about new and existing projects.  Projects which fail to complete 
in time to satisfy real market needs ought to be disbanded.  If there is no 
substantial current market requirement or clear industry consensus for 
standardizing an emerging technology, a project ought not be pursued.  The 
formal structure that is in place should not be so confining that the work 
cannot be progressed in a reasonable and time efficient manner.  Liaisons 
must become interactive participants.

JTC 1 must establish its work program based on common, accepted business 
practices.  To begin a new project, a business case must be made.  The value 
to the marketplace must be determined and a reasonable time line must be 
established.  Current and additional resources must be identified and 
coordinated.  The concept of "minimum buy-in" should be addressed ---
does the JTC 1 structure support an activity when few standards developers 
are involved?  JTC 1 should leverage off of work done elsewhere; the PAS 
process will allow new technology to be imported to the JTC 1 environment. 
 A healthy balance between new, highly visible projects to more established 
(e.g. more mature technologies, maintenance) projects will be needed.

For economic and production reasons, the SCs must be open to significant 
realignment.  The coordinated work of a single SC should produce an 
implementable solution for the customer.  Rather than individual, 
 uncoordinated technical activities, the program of work should respond to a 
unified, end user perspective.  Market driven requirements will define the 
scope of work that an SC undertakes.  New work items can provide the 
underpinnings of standard functionality.  Any PAS contribution that 
contributes to that scope of work would also fall within that SC's domain. 
 Work that has been progressed by consortia or industry interests should be 
attracted to become part of the total solution.  Additionally, any technical 
"glue" that would be required to hold the standards together would also be 
within the purview of the SC.

Managing the scope of the SC will be very important.  For instance, a scope 
of "GIS" would be too all encompassing.  However, subject areas such as 
those suggested in the G7 work, or baseline technologies such as the set top 
functionality of IT equipment would be reasonable.  Some opportunity to pull 
the solution together and make certain that interoperability can occur
would also be of value. Prototyping will ensure the proof of the standard. 
 Iterative implementations will guarantee that the quality of the standard 
increases given real experience.  For those technologies that can be 
considered tools or techniques that span multiple SCs (e.g. programming 
languages, databases), it will be imperative that they substantiate the 
value they provide to the solution based SCs.  It is also important that the 
solutions provided by JTC 1 act as an underlying framework to end user 
applications.  In other words, while JTC 1 would not standardize on banking 
applications or electronic publishing applications, the interfaces of the 
JTC 1 standards must be sufficient to support both application environments.

SC concentration on a total solution area should also attract greater user 
involvement.  The business case will provide valuable information to the 
users as to how the standard can apply to their requirements.  A user role 
of assisting with the business case, commenting on the progress and 
direction of the standards development, and assisting with applications that 
can
prototype the implementations will advance the role of the end user within 
the formal standard setting process.  Promotion of the standards will be 
much easier as some implementable successes will already have been 
documented and can be shared.  End users will immediately see how a standard 
solves their business problems, not just be informed that paper has been 
generated.

The US recommends that JTC 1 establish itself as the premier international 
IT standards development organization using well established business 
practices.  Our products meet the end user's standards needs, providing the 
building blocks they require to implement their business applications. Our 
services integrate PAS and consortia contributions into a total, integrated 
solution.  Our reputation improves as our standards are seen as aggressive, 
enabling technologies that are fundamental to the development of the Global 
Information Society.

JTC 1 Processes

In order to meet its goals, it is important for JTC 1 to reexamine its 
processes.  It might prove valuable to clearly delineate between the two 
aspects of JTC 1's work; that of approving international standards and that 
of developing standards.

1.  Approval

One of the most significant values of JTC 1's products is they represent the 
consensus of the international community.  This consensus is determined by 
the votes of the JTC 1 National Bodies, as well as all the ISO and IEC 
member countries.  It is crucial for JTC 1's success that
this consensus be maintained.  In determining their positions, it is 
important the NBs take in account not only the traditional JTC 1 values, 
such as technical quality and completeness, but also consider whether the 
proposed standard helps satisfy JTC 1 goals of market relevance and 
satisfaction of user needs.  To aid in this evaluation, JTC 1 should require 
all standards submitted for approval be accompanied by a response to 
criteria such as those currently required for PAS submissions.  This would 
apply to documents from all sources, including JTC 1 SCs, JTC 1 NBs, and 
recognized PAS Submitters.  The criteria may need to be augmented to ensure 
the proper emphasis on market relevance and acceptance, and response to user 
needs.

2.  Development

Consistent with the recommendation of the Business Planning ad hoc, the 
development process within JTC 1 should be opened to more closely involve 
liaison and other related activities, such as consortia.  The benefits of 
this should include more timely standards that truly
meet market needs and requirements, by involving all interested parties. 
 This would provide both additional expertise focused on the solutions JTC 1 
is developing and additional resources to accomplish the task at hand.

National bodies would fully retain the control they have today.  All new 
work (NPs) would have to be approved by NBs, as today.  Participation by a 
(to be specified) number of National Bodies in a given work item would be 
required, to ensure the activity remains relevant to the needs of the 
market.  Finally, the approval of the resulting standard remains in the 
hands of the National Bodies.  The key change is an opening of the technical 
development process to all interested parties, with the primary benefit 
being incremental resources and expertise providing
solutions for users' needs and requirements.

Clearly, additional work is needed to fully specify the procedural changes 
necessary to implement the principles identified above. Assuming there is 
general support for the direction indicated, future contributions will 
suggest the required detail.

US Contribution - Reengineering Activity
JTC 1 Products and Services

This contribution is the initial US National Body response to the assignment from the JTC 1 Sydney Plenary meeting.  It addressesJTC 1 Products and Services, and suggests how these might evolve as a result of the re-engineering process.  The processes used by JTC 1 are
also considered, and proposals to adapt these to today's environment are offered.

The US also considered the Initial List of Goals and Objectives developed at the Sydney Plenary, and has prepared a revised list,  intended to stimulate additional discussion, and subsequent approval by JTC 1.

Finally, the US believes it is important for JTC 1 to have a clearly articulated Scope and Mission statement, which are supportive of JTC 1's goals and objectives.

JTC 1 Goals and Objectives

The US believes JTC 1 must agree on goals and objectives as an essential element of the reengineering activity. The US recognizes the Initial List of Goals and Objectives, as contained in Attachment 1 of JTC 1 N 4058,  Resolutions of the Sydney Plenary. is a result of a "brainstorming" session during the reengineering ad hoc meeting.  The US notes many items
on the initial list are inter-related, and suggests additional discussion of the goals and objectives may improve their clarity.  To this end, the US has reviewed the sixteen goals and objectives put forward in Sydney.  They have been organized into five basic categories, which are stated as follows: 

(1) JTC 1 standards development should be conducted with full attention to a strong business-like approach (e.g., cost effective, short development times, market-oriented results).
    (1, 2b, 10, 11b, 13)

(2) The JTC 1 community should actively promote its products and services (and the benefits of using IS) such that "customers" are attracted to both the development of standards and their timely implementation in the form of useful products on a worldwide basis.
    (4, 7, 11a, 14)

(3) JTC 1 products and services, as well as the functioning of the organization itself, must be of sufficiently high quality and within its scope and mission.
    (5, 16)

(4) JTC 1 should provide a wide range of products and services that cover a wide spectrum of needs and that apply to all countries on a global basis.
   (3, 8, 9)

(5) JTC 1 should ensure that user needs are fully met, such that its products and services promote international trade through their use.
   (2a, 6, 15)

The numbers in parentheses following each category refer to the sixteen points in the Initial List of Goals and Objectives.  It is intended the essence of all the original statements be captured in the above five categories.

JTC 1 Scope and Mission

The following Proposed Scope and Mission Statements are offered for JTC 1 discussion and comment.  These statements can be important vehicles to both guide JTC 1 in the future, as well as communicate what JTC 1 is to the world wide IT community.

Proposed Scope Statement

International standardization in the field of information technology which encompasses the processing, transfer, display,  management, organization, storage and retrieval of information.

Proposed Mission Statement

JTC 1's mission is to:

   * Develop and  maintain information technology standards, and promote and facilitate their 	use
   
   * Provide an efficient process for the development of international standards.

Strategy for Products and Services

JTC 1 should capitalize on its strengths and use the existing structure to create value for its customers.  Strengths that can be identified are either technology based (e.g. information encoding, database,  languages, storage) or process based (e.g., National Body representation,
international industrial involvement, fiscal resources).  Many of these activities set the foundation for value-added services which JTC 1 can offer to the global standards community.

To remain viable and competitive in the future, JTC 1 will need to be more discerning about new and existing projects.  Projects which fail to complete in time to satisfy real market needs ought to be disbanded.  If there is no substantial current market requirement or clear industry consensus for standardizing an emerging technology, a project ought not be pursued.  The formal structure that is in place should not be so confining that the work cannot be progressed in a reasonable and time efficient manner.  Liaisons must become interactive participants.

JTC 1 must establish its work program based on common, accepted business practices.  To begin a new project, a business case must be made.  The value to the marketplace must be determined and a reasonable time line must be established.  Current and additional resources must be identified and coordinated.  The concept of "minimum buy-in" should be addressed --- 
does the JTC 1 structure support an activity when few standards developers are involved?  JTC 1 should leverage off of work done elsewhere; the PAS process will allow new technology to be imported to the JTC 1 environment.  A healthy balance between new, highly visible projects to more established (e.g. more mature technologies, maintenance) projects will be needed.

For economic and production reasons, the SCs must be open to significant realignment.  The coordinated work of a single SC should produce an implementable solution for the customer.  Rather than individual,  uncoordinated technical activities, the program of work should respond to a unified, end user perspective.  Market driven requirements will define the scope of work that an SC undertakes.  New work items can provide the underpinnings of standard functionality.  Any PAS contribution that contributes to that scope of work would also fall within that SC's domain.  Work that has been progressed by consortia or industry interests should be attracted to become part of the total solution.  Additionally, any technical "glue" that would be required to hold the standards together would also be within the purview of the SC.

Managing the scope of the SC will be very important.  For instance, a scope of "GIS" would be too all encompassing.  However, subject areas such as those suggested in the G7 work, or baseline technologies such as the set top functionality of IT equipment would be reasonable.  Some opportunity to pull the solution together and make certain that interoperability can occur 
would also be of value. Prototyping will ensure the proof of the standard.  Iterative implementations will guarantee that the quality of the standard increases given real experience.  For those technologies that can be considered tools or techniques that span multiple SCs (e.g. programming languages, databases), it will be imperative that they substantiate the value they provide to the solution based SCs.  It is also important that the solutions provided by JTC 1 act as an underlying framework to end user applications.  In other words, while JTC 1 would not standardize on banking applications or electronic publishing applications, the interfaces of the JTC 1 standards must be sufficient to support both application environments.

SC concentration on a total solution area should also attract greater user involvement.  The business case will provide valuable information to the users as to how the standard can apply to their requirements.  A user role of assisting with the business case, commenting on the progress and direction of the standards development, and assisting with applications that can
prototype the implementations will advance the role of the end user within the formal standard setting process.  Promotion of the standards will be much easier as some implementable successes will already have been documented and can be shared.  End users will immediately see how a standard solves their business problems, not just be informed that paper has been generated.

The US recommends that JTC 1 establish itself as the premier international IT standards development organization using well established business practices.  Our products meet the end user's standards needs, providing the building blocks they require to implement their business applications. Our services integrate PAS and consortia contributions into a total, integrated solution.  Our reputation improves as our standards are seen as aggressive, enabling technologies that are fundamental to the development of the Global Information Society.

JTC 1 Processes

In order to meet its goals, it is important for JTC 1 to reexamine its processes.  It might prove valuable to clearly delineate between the two aspects of JTC 1's work; that of approving international standards and that of developing standards.

1.  Approval

One of the most significant values of JTC 1's products is they represent the consensus of the international community.  This consensus is determined by the votes of the JTC 1 National Bodies, as well as all the ISO and IEC member countries.  It is crucial for JTC 1's success that
this consensus be maintained.  In determining their positions, it is important the NBs take in account not only the traditional JTC 1 values, such as technical quality and completeness, but also consider whether the proposed standard helps satisfy JTC 1 goals of market relevance and satisfaction of user needs.  To aid in this evaluation, JTC 1 should require all standards submitted for approval be accompanied by a response to criteria such as those currently required for PAS submissions.  This would apply to documents from all sources, including JTC 1 SCs, JTC 1 NBs, and recognized PAS Submitters.  The criteria may need to be augmented to ensure the proper emphasis on market relevance and acceptance, and response to user needs.

2.  Development

Consistent with the recommendation of the Business Planning ad hoc, the development process within JTC 1 should be opened to more closely involve liaison and other related activities, such as consortia.  The benefits of this should include more timely standards that truly
meet market needs and requirements, by involving all interested parties.  This would provide both additional expertise focused on the solutions JTC 1 is developing and additional resources to accomplish the task at hand.

National bodies would fully retain the control they have today.  All new work (NPs) would have to be approved by NBs, as today.  Participation by a (to be specified) number of National Bodies in a given work item would be required, to ensure the activity remains relevant to the needs of the market.  Finally, the approval of the resulting standard remains in the hands of the National Bodies.  The key change is an opening of the technical development process to all interested parties, with the primary benefit being incremental resources and expertise providing
solutions for users' needs and requirements.

Clearly, additional work is needed to fully specify the procedural changes necessary to implement the principles identified above. Assuming there is general support for the direction indicated, future contributions will suggest the required detail.