Trying to stay sane and make sense of a world gone mad. #Data #assetmanagement #photography #skiing UK based
Replying to @webmink@meshed.cloud
@webmink @rigo I'm on AMT/4, B/555 and AMS/1 in the UK and ISO/TC184/SC4/WG13.
I used the word 'elevation' rather than promotion, conversion etc. to explore whether the current version of ActivityPub (or the latest development of it) 'just' became an ISO. (I know the standard processes are 24 or 36 months, but just wondering a What If.....
Replying to @lobingera@chaos.social
@lobingera @jwildeboer Just thinking about the EU, for example, creating WSocial rather than implementing an ActivityPub type solution.
If ActivityPub were an ISO standard, would that have given it the credibility for the EU to adopt it rather than create something else?
So, the problem I am suggesting this would solve is to increase the credibility and therefore increase the reach/ implementation of ActivityPub over proprietary approaches e.g. Xitter, Facebook etc.
@rigo @webmink I'm certainly not suggesting creation of a 'rival'/ different standard. More the elevation of ActivityPub to become a standard. This would provide more gravitas and perhaps help get wider adoption/ implementation.
Standards do not have to be Word documents. ISO 16739 (IFC or Industry Foundation Classes) was developed by buildingSMART International and then became an ISO standard. It is a data schema rather than a 'document'
Replying to @webmink@meshed.cloud
@webmink Two thoughts:
1. The PAS process, whilst easier, would need a body to fund it. The end result would, arguably, have less 'weight' than a full ISO
2. I may be wrong, but I don't believe ISO can charge to use standards, only to purchase the standard. This may mean those developing, say, a standard implementation of the standard, would need to pay to read/ access it. Those wanting to use the resulting implementation would not need to purchase anything from ISO. Knowing it was developed to the ISO standard will add credibility
Just thinking out loud....
Would conversion of the #ActivityPub protocol to become an official #ISO standard be a good move?
Plus sides:
* Adds legitimacy
* The standards review process involving many experts/ countries could potentially enhance the protocol
Down sides:
* Developing a standard is slooowww - may reduce the speed of development
* Gaining international consensus at this level may take much effort