Innovation Harmonization and Standards Life-cycle management

  • How does OGC allow for innovation to happen to support technology and market shifts while maintaining existing standards? We have a mature standards baseline that has been braodly implemented, is mandated in numerous policy statements, and (flaws and all) provides a much higher level of interoperability than prior to the work of the OGC. However, there are numerous market forces (business, technical, human, and cultural) that are driving requirements for lighter, more agile standards that may conflict with the existing OGC baseline. The OGC members have always been highly innocative and creative. How does the OGC accommodate the installed base using the current OGC/ISO baseline with the requirements of the mobile internet, Internet of Things, AR, and so forth? There are related questions and issues related to the OGC having standards that have some level of overlapping capability:
    • Sponsors (such as governments) who require compliance with OGC standards will discover that applications don't communicate together, due to applications supporting different OGC standards that essentially do the same thing.
    • If there is overlapping functionality on one or more OGC standards, we need to consider the cost to application developers, systems integrators, testers and sponsors to support all relevant OGC standards will be substantially increased.
  • Is there member consensus that harmonization and innovation are accepted principles / goals of the consortium? And the related question:
  • How will OGC address externally submitted spatial / location standards that are widely (globally) used and overlap or conflict with the existing OGC baseline?
    • Who maintains the externally developed specifications that then become OGC standards?
    • What are the IPR implications?
  • How might the OGC development process be modified to encourage documentation as the last phase of the process, with heavy emphasis on experimentation, testing, validation up front? Think about an agile process - learn from the OGC testbed process.

Cameron Shorter: Answers to this question should be translated into business problems in order to answer.

What do OGC sponsors wish to achieve from standards? Do sponsors wish to encourage mass market uptake? Will mass market uptake attract more OGC sponsors and funding to sustain OGC activities? What will attract mass market uptake? Such things as clear documentation, 1 page overviews, etc will increase uptake. Will increased standards uptake from clear documentation justify investment?

Similar business analysis should be applied to question of potentially overlapping standards, or whether to invest in testing frameworks and quality control.

Leadership and recommendations from OGC to members would be of benefit here, and it would be appropriate to draw upon research from specific OGC members.

-- CameronShorter - 02 Jul 2013
 
Edit | Attach | Print version | History: r8 | r6 < r5 < r4 < r3 | Backlinks | View wiki text | Edit WikiText | More topic actions...
Topic revision: r5 - 30 Jul 2013, AdrianCuster
 

This site is powered by FoswikiThe information you supply is used for OGC purposes only. We will never pass your contact details to any third party without your prior consent.
If you enter content here you are agreeing to the OGC privacy policy.

Copyright © by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding OGC Public Wiki? Send feedback