From: "Bruce Lilly" <blilly(_at_)erols(_dot_)com>
Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 10:49 AM
Subject: Re: Why old-standards (Re: List of Old Standards to be retired)
1. annual review of hundreds or thousands of standards in an
organization comprised primarily of volunteers is not
practical. IEEE had, in the mid-90s, a 5-year review
policy (as I understand it, tied to an ANSI cycle tied
to an ISO cycle), and was rather far behind in its efforts
to review (and reaffirm, supersede, or obsolete) old
standards (some which were still deemed useful had
vacuum-tube circuit diagrams as examples of implementation).
The effort required by the review period needs to be
consistent with the availability of qualified and motivated
worker bees that will perform the review.
Obviously, YMMV. In INCITS T3, the periodic review of ISO standards
didn't require too much effort. The ISO periodic review simply required
answering a very short list of mostly yes-no questions, like "Is this
standard in use in industry," concluded with a retain/revise/withdraw
recommendation. With the exception of the withdrawal of ASN.1
in favor of what many of us no-so-jokingly called ASN.2, it worked
fairly well, at least in the areas where I was active.
However, I think it's a mistake to compare this effort to the ISO periodic
review. Procedurally, this is much more comparable to the rules for
progressing from CD / FCD to DIS (and eventually to IS).
Ietf mailing list