2 ms·
ISO 1 Standard
- ggm 3y agoYou will notice that its a pre-existing CIPM standard, ratified by the ISO. This is a normal practice: it doesn't proscriptively define ahead what it should be it defines retrospectively what it should be, based on what is observed to be viable and functional. On the whole, I think I find retrospective standardisation easier to understand but the huge risk is that it enshrines first-adopter advantage. Thats why I think we get pressure to e.g. NOT just standardize QUIC as it emerges from google, but to work it into something which reflects that experience, but is also more neutral to competitive advantage (within limits)