mlsmith@NADC.ARPA (10/01/85)
----- Mail saved at Tue Oct 1 09:32:19 1985 To: "henry%utzoo.uucp@BRL" Subject: Re: Suite numbers Having dealt with CBEMA before on ANSI X3B6 the admonition about suite numbers is not unfounded in this case. CBEMA seems to purport itself to _be_ ANSI! It is not; it is a private profit making company much like many of the other beltway bandits subsisting on government contracts. Additionally because of prohibitions of certain conduct of government employees, the use of a contrac tor to interface with the industry representatives avoids these situations. CBEMA is only as secure as its likelihood of another government contract. Whichever way the congress blows, mlsmith@nadc.ARPA
dlc@lanl.ARPA (10/12/85)
> ----- Mail saved at Tue Oct 1 09:32:19 1985 > To: "henry%utzoo.uucp@BRL" > Subject: Re: Suite numbers > > Having dealt with CBEMA before on ANSI X3B6 the admonition about suite > numbers is not unfounded in this case. CBEMA seems to purport itself to _be_ > ANSI! It is not; it is a private profit making company much like many of the > other beltway bandits subsisting on government contracts. Additionally because > of prohibitions of certain conduct of government employees, the use of a contrac > tor to interface with the industry representatives avoids these situations. > CBEMA is only as secure as its likelihood of another government contract. > > Whichever way the congress blows, > mlsmith@nadc.ARPA *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE *** Subject: Re: Suite numbers Newsgroups: net.micro References: <1833@brl-tgr.ARPA> > ----- Mail saved at Tue Oct 1 09:32:19 1985 > To: "henry%utzoo.uucp@BRL" > numbers is not unfounded in this case. CBEMA seems to purport itself to _be_ > ANSI! It is not; it is a private profit making company much like many of the > other beltway bandits subsisting on government contracts. Additionally because > of prohibitions of certain conduct of government employees, the use of a contrac > tor to interface with the industry representatives avoids these situations. > CBEMA is only as secure as its likelihood of another government contract. > Whichever way the congress blows, > mlsmith@nadc.ARPA I was an observer (which means I got about 2 pounds of first class mail per week) of X3/X4 for about 3 years in the late 70's. CBEMA is neither a government contractor nor a profit making company. It is an industry trade association with members like IBM, etc. That means its main function is to inform whoever asks about the interests of its members. Except in the case of legislators and government administrators, no asking is required, and informing is also known as lobbying. Another function CBEMA happens to have is to act as the "secretariat" for ANSI committees X3 (computer-related) and X4 (office equipment-related) standards. (It seems to me maybe X3 and X4 have merged, to correspond with the merger of ISO committees TC97 and TC98.) Other organizations act as secretariat for other ANSI committees. ANSI is also neither a part of any government nor under contract to any government. I don't know how you could think CBEMA "purports itself to _be_ ANSI." X3 sub-committees, such as X3B6, draft and solicit comments on proposed standards. CBEMA provides an office which distributes notices of meetings and drafts of proposed standards. There is a formal method by which proposed standards are passed, by voting, to become ANSI standards. If they do not pass, the drafts become waste-paper, as do out-of-date drafts. If you need a draft of an X3 proposed standard or an ISO TC97 proposed standard, you cannot order it from ANSI and you can order it from CBEMA. Maybe you can get it somewhere else, such as from a sub-committee member. If you need a copy of an official ANSI standard, you can order it from ANSI (and not from CBEMA.) Opinion -- It is entirely appropriate that private concerns administer standards in the United States. The National Bureau of Standards is the closest the government comes, and it was intended in early times to make sure separate retailers had the same weight or volume of whatever they sold, so consumers would not be cheated. The involvement of NBS in computers seems to be limited to publishing standards that apply to government and government-contract sites, called FIPS for Federal Information Processing Standards. Most FIPS are copies of ANSI standards, done some years later than ANSI. In other words, NBS could not keep up with the work they would be required to do. That's not a criticism of the NBS. Obviously, the current system is financed by customers of companies whose products involve the standards. If I didn't buy computers, I would not want my taxes to go to pay for developing standards related to computers. On the other hand, to the extent that FIPS help the government use computers more effectively, I don't mind my taxes being spent on FIPS. What we could all use are more manufacturers who don't think, "if I make my system different, my customers will be locked-in for decades to my systems." And who are not nearly ignorant of what standards there are (anyone like CBM-SCII or Atari-SCII?) CBEMA -- Computer and Business Equipment Manufacturers' Association ANSI -- American National Standards Institute ISO -- International Standards Organization