Internet Info 1994 March/Internet Info CD-ROM (Walnut Creek) (March 1994).iso/standards/ansi/X3T9/area01/t9sumpro.txt

Text File | 1992-05-12 | 5.6 KB | 106 lines

        W. E. Burr
                                             23 MAR 1988


               GETTING YOUR IDEAS ACCEPTED IN X3T9
A lot of people come to meetings of X3T9 or its TGs because they
have something they wish to propose to the committee.  They may
wish to change something in a draft standard, or to add
something, or to get something eliminated, or even to start a
whole new standard.  The purpose of this section is to give some
advice on how to go about getting your ideas or proposal
accepted.

First, except for comparatively minor points, it's hard to get
much done strictly by mail.  You have to be prepared to come to
some meetings.  The reason is simple.  The TGs are busy with the
proposals of the people who do come to the meetings to get their
point across.  A letter to the Chair may be useful to start
people thinking, and will nearly always be distributed to the
members, but is usually sufficient only when the point is simple
and definite, for example to point out a clear error in a draft.
If your idea is complex, difficult or controversial you will have
to come to meetings, probably several meetings, and may have to
become a member and do a lot of work.  Remember that what seems
sensible to you may seem silly and wrongheaded to others.  So be
sure you have some commitment to whatever it is you wish to do
before you start and be prepared to do some work.

Think out just what it is you wish to accomplish, then call the
Chair of the appropriate TG and talk it over with him.  He can
usually help, for example, by suggesting that the appropriate
place to present you idea is a specific working group, or by
putting you in touch with others already working on the same
problem.  He can also include copies of a written proposal in the
committee mailings or supply you with a mailing list.  Since
committee mailings are put together shortly after each meeting,
at two month intervals, it may be helpful to make a mailing
yourself for an urgent item.  It's better to get your proposal to
the committee before the meeting, so members can look it over
before the meeting.  No one likes surprises.

Even if you don't get anything to the members before the meeting
you still need something on paper.  The members need something to
study and it is much easier to come to agreement about a specific
written proposal than an just an oral presentation.  Try to
provide the exact words or values you wish to see in the
standard.  It's much easier to agree to specific words than to
agree to something in principle, then determine the words later.
There is a good chance that  a decision will be deferred to
consideration by a working group if the proposal is complex or
controversial in any way, so the paper is necessary.  Even though
you have written something up, however, expect to be asked to
give a brief presentation or explanation (usually 5 to 10
minutes).  Be prepared to defend your idea, and don't be
surprised if you get a hostile reaction from some members.  Few
ideas are so good that they fail to find their detractors among
the ablest of men.

The style of the TGs varies somewhat.  X3T9.2 and X3T9.3 tend to
work from papers, while viewgraph presentations are more common
in X3T9.5.  Paper or viewgraphs, bring enough copies for
everyone.  That means at least 75 copies for plenary meetings of
X3T9.2 or X3T9.5 (100 copies is better), while 25 to 50 copies
are sufficient for X3T9.3 and most working group meetings.

Some things are more difficult than others.  If you make some
sort of component, for example, a driver, receiver or connector,
which you think would be ideal for application to a particular
interface standard, rest assured that someone else makes
something which is incompatible and which he wishes written
into the standard.  Most of the members simply will want to
draft the standard so that as wide a choice of components as
possible can be used while still permitting interoperability.  It
is very hard to get something tailored simply to your part.
Expect violent opposition if other component vendors are likely
to perceive your proposal as giving you some proprietary
advantage, even a transient one.  Be prepared to license needed
patents.  Don't expect the committee to design around your
product, however good it is, unless there are other suppliers, at
least in prospect.  In some cases it has taken a full court
press of three or more years, and a major retooling, to get
a connector accepted as the baseline for the standard.

If you want to propose, say, a new SCSI Command Set for Left
Handed Widgets,  expect to be asked to head a working group on
the subject.  The committee won't know much about Left Handed
Widgets, but will generally want to be sure that something put in
the SCSI standard is broadly acceptable to the Left Handed Widget
industry.  This may take time, because it will involve
publicizing the effort.  If you face opposition, it is likely to
come from other makers of Left Handed Widgets, rather than from
the folks who are already on the committee.  In general they want
to see SCSI used for everything from soup to nuts.  At the same
time, they won't want to delay publication of the next revision
of the standard just for Widgets.  This is not necessarily a bad
thing, a lot of products can be and have been built around
committee drafts, and sometimes it's a good thing to get some
market experience before the final thing is "frozen" in the
standard.

In summary, it can be a rewarding and productive experience to
propose your ideas for inclusion in an interface standard, but it
is nearly always a lot of work.  If you see a return on your
effort, then do it, but expect to spend some time and effort at
it and to learn a lot while you are doing it.