- commit
- 3a92d9ab67078755e6e71c4576caf4d8abd1076e
- parent
- 67b427b902186f3cb346ece24a7f16b2704e5ad5
- Author
- Tobias Bengfort <tobias.bengfort@liqd.de>
- Date
- 2013-11-13 13:25
finish slides for tonight
Diffstat
| M | custom.css | 52 | ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- |
| A | screws.jpg | 0 | |
| M | standards.md | 225 | ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------- |
3 files changed, 183 insertions, 94 deletions
diff --git a/custom.css b/custom.css
@@ -1,21 +1,53 @@ 1 1 <style type="text/css"> -1 2 body { -1 3 text-rendering: optimizeLegibility; -1 4 line-height: 1.4; -1 5 } -1 6 section { -1 7 padding: 15px; -1 8 } 2 9 section > *:first-child:last-child {3 -1 display: table-cell;4 -1 vertical-align: middle;5 -1 height: 600px;6 -1 width: 800px;-1 10 display: table-cell; -1 11 vertical-align: middle; -1 12 height: 570px; -1 13 width: 770px; 7 14 } 8 15 img {9 -1 max-width: 100%;10 -1 max-height: 600px;-1 16 max-width: 100%; -1 17 max-height: 600px; 11 18 } 12 19 a {13 -1 color: #446191;-1 20 color: #446191; 14 21 } 15 22 code.url {16 -1 font-family: inherit;-1 23 font-family: inherit; -1 24 } -1 25 li { -1 26 margin: 0.5em 0; -1 27 } -1 28 figure:not(:first-child), -1 29 figure:not(:last-child) { -1 30 height: auto; -1 31 width: auto; -1 32 } -1 33 figure:not(:first-child) img, -1 34 figure:not(:last-child) img { -1 35 height: auto; -1 36 } -1 37 figure:not(:first-child) figcaption, -1 38 figure:not(:last-child) figcaption { -1 39 display: none; -1 40 } -1 41 figure:not(:first-child) > *, -1 42 figure:not(:last-child) > * { -1 43 position: relative; -1 44 } -1 45 -1 46 dt { -1 47 font-weight: bold; -1 48 margin-top: 0.5em; 17 49 }18 -1 ul, ol {19 -1 line-height: 1.8em;-1 50 dd { -1 51 padding-left: 1.5em; 20 52 } 21 53 </style>
diff --git a/screws.jpg b/screws.jpg
Binary files differ.diff --git a/standards.md b/standards.md
@@ -1,116 +1,169 @@1 -1 # Introduction-1 1 # Standards -1 2 -1 3  2 43 -1 - everyone respects standards4 -1 - very few people know how standards are created5 5 6 6 # What is a standard? 7 78 -1 - A (technical) specification is a standard if it is widely established.9 -1 - It may be a *de facto* or *de jure* standard, where only the latter has10 -1 gone through a formal standardization process with an established11 -1 standardization organisation.12 -1 - A standard therefore needs legitimacy-1 8 - A (technical) specification is a standard if it is widely established. -1 9 - It may be a *de facto* or *de jure* standard, where only the latter has -1 10 gone through a formal standardization process with an established -1 11 standardization organisation. -1 12 - A standard therefore needs legitimacy -1 13 13 14 14 15 # parties involved 15 16 16 17 stakeholders17 -1 : anyone with an interest in a proposed standard-1 18 : anyone with an interest in a proposed standard 18 19 implementors19 -1 : anyone who will implement (parts of) the standard-1 20 : anyone who will implement (parts of) the standard 20 21 users21 -1 : anyone who might use an implementation-1 22 : anyone who might use an implementation 22 23 sponsor23 -1 : proposes a specification for standardization-1 24 : proposes a specification for standardization -1 25 -1 26 # parties involved -1 27 24 28 standardization organisation25 -1 : organisation which manages the standardization process-1 29 : organisation which manages the standardization process 26 30 working group (WG)27 -1 : the people who manage the standardization process28 -1 for the *standardization organisation*-1 31 : the people who manage the standardization process -1 32 for the *standardization organisation* 29 33 advisors/experts30 -1 : external people who are asked to participate in the standardization31 -1 process. May be members of the *working group*-1 34 : external people who are asked to participate in the standardization -1 35 process. May be members of the *working group* -1 36 32 37 33 38 # open standard 34 3935 -1 - anyone (especially implementors) have unrestricted access36 -1 (e.g. no fees or classification)37 -1 - free implementations must exist38 -1 - anyone can participate in the creation and further development of the standard-1 40 - anyone (especially implementors) have unrestricted access -1 41 (e.g. no fees or classification) -1 42 - free implementations must exist -1 43 - anyone can participate in the creation and further development of the standard 39 44 40 45 <http://documentfreedom.org/openstandards.html> 41 46 <http://www.csrstds.com/openstds.html> 42 47 -1 48 43 49 # decentralization 44 5045 -1 - hacker ethics call for decentralization46 -1 - standards provide ways for decentralizing technology47 -1 - at the same time, the standardization process itself is48 -1 necessarily centralized-1 51 - hacker ethics call for decentralization -1 52 - standards provide ways for decentralizing technology -1 53 - at the same time, the standardization process itself is -1 54 necessarily centralized -1 55 - everyone respects standards -1 56 - very few people know how standards are created -1 57 49 58 50 59 # overview of standardization organisations 51 60 52 61 # International Organisation for Standardization (ISO)53 -1 - ISO 639 – Codes for the representation of names of languages (de_DE)54 -1 - ISO 8601 – Representation of dates and times (1999-12-31 23:59:58)55 -1 - ISO/IEC 8859 – 8-bit single-byte coded graphic character sets56 -1 - ISO/IEC 26300 – Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) v1.057 -1 - ISO/IEC 29500 – Office Open XML File Formats58 -1 - specs are not open (fees)59 -1 - only member organisations are allowed to vote-1 62 -1 63 - ISO 639 – Codes for the representation of names of languages (de_DE) -1 64 - ISO 8601 – Representation of dates and times (1999-12-31 23:59:58) -1 65 - ISO/IEC 8859 – 8-bit single-byte coded graphic character sets -1 66 -1 67 # International Organisation for Standardization (ISO) -1 68 -1 69 - ISO/IEC 26300 – Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) v1.0 -1 70 - ISO/IEC 29500 – Office Open XML File Formats -1 71 -1 72 # International Organisation for Standardization (ISO) -1 73 -1 74 - "network of national standards bodies" -1 75 - specs are not open (fees) -1 76 - only member organisations are allowed to vote -1 77 - "fast-track procedure" possible if the document was developed by an -1 78 international standardizing body recognized by the ISO Council -1 79 60 80 61 81 # Deutsches Institut für Normung (DIN)62 -1 - DIN 476: international paper sizes (now ISO 216)-1 82 -1 83 - german member of ISO -1 84 - DIN 476 (ISO 216): international paper sizes -1 85 63 86 64 87 # Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)65 -1 - IEEE 802.x – networking66 -1 - IEEE 1003 – Unix compatibility programming standard - POSIX67 -1 - allowed to vote is "any individual who has expressed an interest in the subject matter of the standard"-1 88 -1 89 - IEEE 802.x – networking -1 90 - IEEE 1003 – Unix compatibility programming standard - POSIX -1 91 - allowed to vote is "any individual who has expressed an interest in the subject matter of the standard" -1 92 -1 93 -1 94 # Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) -1 95 -1 96 - RFC 1034/1035 DNS -1 97 - RFC 1157 IMAP -1 98 - RFC 2616 HTTP -1 99 - RFC 2821 SMTP 68 100 69 101 # Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)70 -1 - RFC 1034/1035 DNS71 -1 - RFC 1157 IMAP72 -1 - RFC 2616 HTTP73 -1 - RFC 2821 SMTP74 -1 - RFC 1149 IP on Avian Carriers (Pidgins)75 -1 - RFC 2324 Hyper Text Coffee Pot Control Protocol76 -1 - "rough consensus and running code"77 -1 - discussion on archived mailing lists-1 102 -1 103 - RFC 1149 IP on Avian Carriers (Pidgins) -1 104 - RFC 2324 Hyper Text Coffee Pot Control Protocol -1 105 -1 106 # Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) -1 107 -1 108 - Request for Comments (RFC) -1 109 - "rough consensus and running code" -1 110 - discussion on archived mailing lists -1 111 -1 112 -1 113 # World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) -1 114 -1 115 - founded and headed by Tim Berners-Lee -1 116 - HTML/CSS -1 117 - WCAG/ARIA (Accessibility) -1 118 -1 119 # World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) -1 120 -1 121 Working Draft -1 122 : anyone is asked for comment -1 123 Candidate Recommendation -1 124 : implementors are asked for feedback -1 125 Proposed Recommendation -1 126 : W3C advisory council is asked to approve -1 127 W3C Recommendation -1 128 : process is completed 78 129 79 130 # World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)80 -1 - founded and headed by Tim Berners-Lee81 -1 - HTML/CSS82 -1 - WCAG83 -1 - Working Draft - anyone is asked for comment84 -1 - Candidate Recommendation - implementors are asked for feedback85 -1 - Proposed Recommendation - W3C advisory council is asked to approve86 -1 - W3C Recommendation87 -1 - no certification program, but free validators88 -1 - members are mostly big companies like IBM, Google, Facebook, Deutsche Telekom etc.89 -1 - discussion on archived mailing lists90 -191 -1 # WHAT WG92 -1 - formed when W3C was moving in a different direction than implementors93 -1 - HTML5-1 131 -1 132 - no certification program, but free validators -1 133 - members are mostly big companies like IBM, Google, Facebook, Deutsche Telekom etc. -1 134 - discussion on archived mailing lists -1 135 - Possible to submit bugs from draft (Example: [HTML5 draft](http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/)) -1 136 -1 137 -1 138 # Web Hypertext Application Technology Working Group (WHAT WG) -1 139 -1 140 - formed when W3C was moving in a different direction than implementors -1 141 - HTML5 94 142 95 143 # python/bittorrent96 -1 - "rough consensus and running code"97 -1 - <http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0001/>98 -1 - <http://bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0001.html>99 -1 - PEP/BEP (Python/BitTorrent Enhancement Proposals)100 -1 - author responsible for building consensus101 -1 - open source reference implementation needed102 -1 - spec must be in public domain103 -1 - Benevolent Dictator for Life, Guido van Rossum/Bram Cohen104 -1105 -1 # standardization process106 -1107 -1 - someone proposes a draft108 -1 - it must be accepted109 -1 - a working group may be formed110 -1 - the process may go through several phases getting inputs from the general public, experts and implementors111 -1 - a high majority or even consensus is required112 -1 - additional requirements (e.g. reference implementation)113 -1 - the final vote is on a closed group of people, e.g. benevolent dictators or member organisations-1 144 -1 145 - [PEP](http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0001/)/[BEP](http://bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0001.html) -1 146 (Python/BitTorrent Enhancement Proposals) -1 147 - "rough consensus and running code" -1 148 - author responsible for building consensus -1 149 - open source reference implementation needed -1 150 - spec must be in public domain -1 151 - Benevolent Dictator for Life, Guido van Rossum/Bram Cohen -1 152 -1 153 -1 154 # summary: standardization process -1 155 -1 156 - someone proposes a draft -1 157 - it must be accepted for consideration -1 158 - a working group may be formed -1 159 - the process may go through several phases getting inputs from the general public, experts and implementors -1 160 -1 161 # summary: standardization process -1 162 -1 163 - a high majority or even consensus is required -1 164 - additional requirements (e.g. reference implementation) -1 165 - the final vote is on a closed group of people, e.g. benevolent dictators or member organisations -1 166 114 167 115 168 # critique 116 169 @@ -123,16 +176,20 @@ advisors/experts 123 176 > Group chairs have acted like bullies. 124 177 > -- <http://www.wcagsamurai.org/erratas/introduction/> 125 178 -1 179 126 180 # What we can learn from this 127 181128 -1 - standards as a different decision goal than laws129 -1 - decision making in a given process needs to be standardized130 -1 - the standardization process itself is optimized for output131 -1 legitimacy by providing enough resources to reach a high132 -1 quality specification, maybe even a consensus-1 182 - standards as an unusual product of an participation process -1 183 - decision making in a given process needs to be standardized -1 184 - most current standardization processes are optimized for output -1 185 legitimacy by providing enough resources to reach a high -1 186 quality specification, maybe even a consensus -1 187 - discussions are done using bug-trackers, mailinglists and -1 188 long dicussions -1 189 133 190 134 191 # What we can provide for this 135 192136 -1 - a better tool for proposing alternative versions and commenting (absatzweise Kommentieren)137 -1 - reaching consensus in long meetings and discussions is currently138 -1 out of our scope-1 193 - a better tool for proposing alternative versions and commenting (*absatzweise Kommentieren*) -1 194 - reaching consensus in long meetings and discussions is currently -1 195 out of our scope