LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for TEAM-ADA Archives


TEAM-ADA Archives

TEAM-ADA Archives


TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

TEAM-ADA Home

TEAM-ADA Home

TEAM-ADA  July 2000

TEAM-ADA July 2000

Subject:

Re: Leveraging MicroSoft's Marketing

From:

Richard Conn <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Richard Conn <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 11 Jul 2000 20:00:06 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (118 lines)

As a rule, standards (IEEE, ISO, etc) are extreme compromises,
and, as such, don't necessarily reflect the state of the art or
push any envelope at all.  Many years ago, I participated in the
IEEE standards effort on the use of Ada as a Design Language.
When the effort was started (and the number of participants was small),
the draft of the standard was large (over 100 pages at one time),
but, as the effort went on and on and people came and went to the meetings
(on many meetings, there were sometimes as many as 40% new faces) and
the flow of thought had to be recaptured, more and more compromises were
made.  After 1 1/2 years, the work was done.  The entire standard was
about 15 pages long, of which the text of the standard took 4 pages,
the list of names of all those involved took 4 pages, and boilerplate
(cover page, table of contents) took the rest.  Look it up ... IEEE
Standard 990-1987.

This is not an isolated case.  If you look at the current IEEE 12207
standard for software engineering, you'll find so much motherhood and
apple pie compromises that if you want to find out about good ideas and
best practices in Software Engineering, you'd be much better off buying
a copy of Roger Pressman's "Software Engineering: A Practictioner's
Approach"
(for the big view) or Steve McConnell's "Software Project Survival Guide"
(for the 3-25 person team project that last 3-18 months).  Steve, who edits
(edited)
the best practices column of IEEE Software, based this work on the CMM,
NASA's Software Engineering Lab, and his own experiences, and this book is
part of Microsoft's Software Engineering Series (did you know they had
one?).

Not too many years ago, Microsoft was much more into forgeing its own way
rather than following open standards.  Microsoft HTML, backed by the MSHTML
ActiveX Control, is a good example of this which caused Microsoft to take a
lot of flack.  The tune at this year's Tech-Ed 2000 conference was
different,
with XML 1.0, an open standard created by the World Wide Web Consortium, was
backed heavily, and there is no Microsoft variant this time that I can tell.
Even the MSDN Library entries on XML contain links to the W3C sites for
detail.
Built into Windows 2000, Windows CE, Windows Millenium, and what looks like
the
rest of the Windows 2000 spinoffs is MSXML, a parser for W3C XML which will
always
be available to any application that wants it.

So, another view of the issue pertaining to Microsoft.

Rick
====================================
Richard Conn, Principal Investigator
Reuse Tapestry


-----Original Message-----
From: Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of David Botton
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 12:05 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Leveraging MicroSoft's Marketing


"At Microsoft, we always feel we can improve on a
standard" (InsideCOM, p 252)

--- "Brashear, Phil" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I'd love to get a copy of that flyer.  Can you help?
>
> I contacted Microsoft a couple of years ago about
> certifying their compilers
> and was pretty much snubbed.  The people I talked to
> indicated that they
> were interested in providing what their customers
> wanted RATHER THAN
> conformance to standards.  (Opinion: Microsoft wants
> to define STANDARD as
> OUR WAY. End Opinion)
>
> Phil
>
> Philip W. Brashear
> EDS Conformance Testing Center
> 4646 Needmore Road, Bin 46
> P.O. Box 24593
> Dayton, OH  45424-0593
> (937) 237-4510
> [log in to unmask]
> http://www.eds-conform.com
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joyce L. Tokar [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, July 10, 2000 9:31 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Leveraging MicroSoft's Marketing
>
>
> I recently received a long (7 pages) flyer from
> MicroSoft expounding upon
> the virtues of certifying software.  In their case
> it is Windows
> 2000.  It seems to me that there is an opportunity
> here for the Ada
> community to jump onto the certified software
> band-wagon along
> with MicroSoft and raise the awareness of the user
> community that some tools
> are certified and have been for a long time.
>
> Comments?
>
> JLTokar


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail  Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
June 2007
May 2007
March 2007
February 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager