This reminds me of the fact that during the Cold War the Swedish military
deliberately made their systems non-interoperable with those of other countries
(like NATO nations) because they didn't want any invading troops to be able to
use any equipment they might capture. (01)
Having said that, the socio-political business model dynamic is not static and
Sweden now wants to be able to interoperate with other nations because they now
see the benefits of interoperation outweighing the perceived risks/costs. The
advent of the Internet and global supply chains and inter/intra-industry
service providers now are leading many companies towards greater
interoperability and abandonment of proprietary standards (or attempting to
make the latter more open, de facto, industry standards). That doesn't mean
some won't still see economic or political advantage by frustrating
interoperability (the Internet itself exhibits some of this behavior at some
national and most corporate domain boundaries). It's best to look at this issue
overall as an evolving ecosystem operating in an evolving environment, both of
which are affected by technological progress and social and business model
innovations/experiments. Darwin rules. In many cases interoperability spells
survival and in other cases it leads to self (or mutual) destruction.
Standards get proposed and gain acceptance/persistence or fall into disuse
accordingly. (02)
Hans (03)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of deddy
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2013 4:06 PM
To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Architectural considerations in Ontology
Development (04)
Aït-Kaci - (05)
>
> only reason the width of a Roman horse's ass over 2000 years ago!
> (06)
Likely largely true. (07)
But... this being America (which I assume is likely the same sort of chaos
elsewhere)... (08)
Around the Civil War there were approximately 21 rail gauges east of the
Mississippi. (09)
Clearly the issue of there being a plethora of "standards" is not a new
challenge. (010)
The corporate game of intentional lack of interoperability is not new. (011)
______________________
David Eddy
Babson Park, MA (012)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/ Community Wiki:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To join:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (013)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (014)
|