| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Everyone,
There has been entirely too much email and phone-based
distractions to the work at hand - distractions that are impeding progress and
polarizing, rather than integrating, ATML's integration into the
IEEE.
The original intent of ATML is to: "Define a
collection of XML schemas that allows ATE and test information to be exchanged
in a common format adhering to the XML standard." To the best of my
knowledge, that intent is shared by everyone involved in the project
over the past 2-1/2 years - we all have common intent and goals for the
project. The scope and purpose of the IEEE PAR 1671, conditionally
approved by IEEE NesCom, substantiates & details the same.
The plan to have a single ATML specification number to invoke as a
contractual binding set of standards and a single website to go to for ATML
schemata is also shared by all involved. But, the intent of all IEEE standards includes fostering technical
innovation on a world-wide scale. In order to do
this, consensus must be achieved on a board scale - something that has been
accomplished in thousands of IEEE standards. The IEEE has tried &
true policies and procedures that facilitate standards
development and minimize the unnecessary duplication of standards
materials, conflict of interests and ultimately litigation.
With respect to the comment that "Most of this concern seems to be a direct result of turf battles
and the forced introduction of other existing standards/PARs or those in
process," I, as chair of SCC20, will not tolerate "turf
battles" and "forced introductions" in the work of this
committee. We IEEE members have a code of ethics that I repeat
below for everyone's consideration. In
particular #2 avoid conflict of interest & #7, in
which we acknowledge that ATML's development, in its current
state, involved many many man-hours on the part of Government and industry,
but also must strive to incorporate that suggestions that improve the
standard - improvements coming from V&V efforts, previous work, etc.
Remember that any and all improvements must be approved on a consensus
basis, so that no one person/entity can unilaterally change a
standard.
What I suspect is going on is much false speculation and
mistrust fostered by semantics and a lack of understanding of the IEEE standards
development process - examples include, "IEEE is going
to unnecessarily delay standardization" or "IEEE is changing "content" by
the way it is organizing the standards." In reality, after a PAR is
approved, the Government can reference drafts of that particular standard as
Pxxxx, the time involved in IEEE publication can be minimized by
planning the ballot process to parallel the V&V of the proposed standards,
and the way IEEE organizes a family of standards does not change
content.
I recommend that the IEEE SCC20 leadership - Chair, Vice-chair
and relevant Subcommittee chairs - meet with the old "ATML leadership" as soon
as possible. (face-to-face meeting preferred) We must learn to
respect and trust each other at this level before we will successfully flow this
down to all involved in the development process.
Les Orlidge
SCC20 Chair
IEEE Code of Ethics:
We, the members of the IEEE, in recognition of the importance of our technologies in affecting the quality of life throughout the world, and in accepting a personal obligation to our profession, its members and the communities we serve, do hereby commit ourselves to the highest ethical and professional conduct and agree: 1. to accept responsibility in making engineering decisions consistent with the safety, health and welfare of the public, and to disclose promptly factors that might endanger the public or the environment; 2. to avoid real or perceived conflicts of interest whenever possible, and to disclose them to affected parties when they do exist;3. to be honest and realistic in stating claims or estimates based on available data; 4. to reject bribery in all its forms; 5. to improve the understanding of technology, its appropriate application, and potential consequences; 6. to maintain and improve our technical competence and to undertake technological tasks for others only if qualified by training or experience, or after full disclosure of pertinent limitations; 7. to seek, accept, and offer honest criticism of technical work, to acknowledge and correct errors, and to credit properly the contributions of others; 8. to treat fairly all persons regardless of such factors as race, religion, gender, disability, age, or national origin; 9. to avoid injuring others, their property, reputation, or employment by false or malicious action; 10. to assist colleagues and co-workers in their professional development and to support them in following this code of ethics. >>> "Birurakis, William Jr. CIV NAVAIR" <william.birurakis@NAVY.MIL> 11/15/04 10:52AM >>> Gentlemen,
ATML
was started by a group composed of both industry and government personnel with
specific initiatives/goals/motives driving the specification development.
There have been significant man-hour contributions made by many companies
and government organizations.
There
has been concern recently expressed by some members of the ATML Working
Group. It is related to loosing or mudding the intent of ATML. Most
of this concern seems to be a direct result of turf battles and the forced
introduction of other existing standards/PARs or those in process. Please
insure the disposition of the ATML schemas considers the original intent of the
group. I will be conducting a teleconference with them to get specifics (I
still consider them the "owners").
Thanks
for trying to expedite the process.
V/R
Bill
|