Distributed embedded condition monitoring systems based on OSA-CBM standard
Computer Standards & Interfaces
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
There is much debate among IT executives and policy-makers as to whether Open Standards, Open Source, and/or something else, are necessary and sufficient to ensure that their software procurements add long-term value to their IT systems. However, a lack of definition of Open Standards makes debate on their meaning, let alone their merits, challenging. This lack of objective definition provides a convenient loophole for vendors to make claims which sound good in theory while protecting bad practices. Given the size of the world-wide software market, and the significant investment that it therefore represents, it is time to define what the software industry (vendors, customers, and users) all claim to want: Open Standards. This paper defines the lower limit of what can be called an Open Standard and then defines a framework for grading Open Standards that exceed that minimum. This framework is then extended to the subject of file formats. This paper does not take the position that Open Source is intrinsically good, nor that Open Source in and of itself is a de facto Open Standard. But it does evaluate the role that Open Source can play to make a good Open Standard better, and argues forcefully that Open Standards without Open Source implementations offer little protection from vendor lock-in.