The topic covered this week (July 20-26, 2009) was all about Standard-Setting and Open Standards. To answer the questions given by the leader of the week which is the first group, I made a research about the subject and read the material that was given to us by our instructor. I would like to say that the said file entitled Free/Open Source Software – Open Standards by Nah Soo Hoe was a good material to read. I think most of the ideas regarding the topics can be found there.

Since I answered already the questions raised by the leader, I would like to sum up it all here.

A Standard-Setting Organization or shortly known as SSO is an organization that sets standards and make recommendations. A formal SSO is recognized as the national standards body and has the authority to designate specifications as the national standards of a country.

For a standard to be said internationally acceptable, it has to be set or adopted/adapted by an international standard-setting body. Such organizations are International Standardization Organization (ISO), International Electro-technical Commission (IEC), International Telecommunication Union (ITU), Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and so much more.

There are three (3) several main processes in setting or creating of new technical standards and these are the following: de jure, de facto and industry-driven standards.

Let us first discuss de jure standard. A de jure standard is normally created or set by formal SSOs. The creation is a repeated cycle of several procedures (deliberation, voting and modification) until the standard is accepted by the organization for publication and becomes a formal standard.

The main advantage of the process is that it follows formal and accountable procedures. Also, the development of the standard is open for all to participate. Members of the SSO and other experts and individuals interested with the standard are given an opportunity to contribute. Given the process of creation, the process is neutral and transparent, and not controlled by any particular group and thus, no lock-in.

Taking into account the advantages, there are also disadvantages in the process. The process can be quite long since it undergoes several procedures and needs approval. The publication of the standard by no means guarantees its success in implementation and usage by the industry and users.

The next standard is what we called the opposite. A de facto standard is set mainly by the vendors or owners of the product. When a product is so popular that becomes generally accepted and widely used by most of the users, as a result, a de facto standard is established even though the standard is not authorized by the standards body.

The advantage of having the de facto standard is that there is an assurance of its widespread acceptance in its implementation and usage. Not like de jure standard in which it should be debated first by the committee and come up with a consensus. Thus, modification and improvement of the standard is also faster.

Before I continue, when I was taught about the EEE tactics which stands for Embrace, Extend and Extinguish, I realized how wise those vendors are. I think the action is some kind of a deception. At first, they will introduce to you their product saying that they are supporting open standards and market to you the product. Then they will take advantage on the standards. When you have already their product, they will say that there is a need to add in proprietary enhancements to improve the product and make their product different from their competitors. Instead of ensuring that the enhanced implementation should still interoperate with the basic one, they are not. Since the standard is so widely used, it now becomes a de facto standard and since the enhancements are proprietary, the standard now becomes proprietary instead of open.

To continue with the processes in setting or creating of new technical standards, the next one is the industry-driven standard – a sort of intermediate between de jure and de facto standard. The standard is set by a group formed.

Reading about de jure, de facto and industry-driven standards, I noticed some information that made me come up with a conclusion. Based on the information I stated above, I would like to say that a de jure standard is an open standard while a de facto standard can be a proprietary standard. Take note, it has been said that the development of a de jure standard is open for all to participate and no lock-in also. Let us try to recall open standard; according to Nah Soo Hoe, the following are the characteristics of an open standard: (1) openly developed, (2) openly maintained, (3) openly modified, (4) openly accessible, (5) openly implemented. Further, a proprietary standard is in contrast to open standard and has the following characteristics: (1) development and maintenance is controlled fully by vendor alone, (2) development and maintenance is not open or just partially open to all interested parties or stakeholders, (3) specifications are not freely available for implementation. So, given the characteristics, my conclusion was based on the comparison between de jure and open standard, between de facto and proprietary standard.

However, if ever my interpretation with regard to my conclusion is wrong, I am open for corrections.

To end this, I would like to say that the topic was interesting for me. The material that I used was also good since most of the topics can be found there and lastly, the most important is that I learned.