Re: comedi as a POSIX standard

Herman Bruyninckx wrote:

> Yes, but why choose POSIX then? Why not the Open Management Group, or
> some other standards body?

I'm not arguing against any other body, I just happen to be more 
familiar with both the process and the product of IEEE. The point is not 
to get some organization's imprimatur, it's to get a really good 
standard. I think the IEEE's process leads to a pretty consistenly good 
product.

But to address OMG specifically, OMG is not a standards body. It's a 
consortium, largely-vendor driven, that publishes specifications. I'm 
not well-versed in their more recent specs, but the early CORBA specs 
were mostly marketing fluff. Being CORBA-compliant didn't mean your 
application your interoperate with multiple vendors' ORBs, nor that the 
ORBs would interoperate with each other. In fact, they didn't. Things 
may have improved since then, but I'm skeptical.

You don't have to be an IEEE member to participate in (or even lead) a 
POSIX working group. (I think. But even if you do, it's around $100 per 
year.) It appears to me from OMB's web site that you can't get voting 
privileges in an Task Force for less than $2200 per year. OMG doesn't 
have individual memberships, as far as I can tell. IEEE has nothing 
*but* individual memberships.

The Open Group would be a better option. I think their track record for 
publishing real open specifications that mean something is better. They 
have a Real-Time & Embedded Systems Forum that might be interested, and 
they do have some precedent for publishing their specs on the web.

Steve

P.S. I guess my email address suggests a disclaimer. I have no 
connection with the IEEE other than being a member.

Received on 2003-04-13Z21:40:26