Archive for December, 2009

On the last work day of the year, I thought I’d write a non-work, non-standards related post.

I really like Brussels sprouts.  Even as a child, I enjoyed the little cabbages, peeling the leaves off one at time to eat them slowly.  This year I discovered some wonderful produce stands in Half Moon Bay CA that sell Brussels sprouts still on the stalk.

If you’ve never seen how they grow, it’s pretty amazing. Here’s a picture. The stalk is about 4 feet tall, and the sprouts are smaller towards the bottom and quite large on the top. The sprouts are easily popped off the stalk and ready to cook in so many delicious ways.

Not only do I like to eat them, but I get a kick out of carrying a stalk of sprouts through the San Francisco airport. Carrying a stalk of Brussels sprouts makes an otherwise boring wait in the airport quite fun.

Talk about a conversation starter. People smile at them. “I love Brussels sprouts,” they say. “Here’s my favorite recipe,” they share. People are amazed by them. “I never knew how they grow,” they tell me. “Wow! That’s beautiful,” they exclaim. And sometimes, people even cringe. “What *are* those? Brussels sprouts? I hate them!”, they state. I always ask them if they’ve ever tried them, and it’s funny how often they say “no”.

The TSA agents enjoy the Brussels sprouts stalk, too. One of them asked me if it was a weapon. I told him of course not, it’s a vegetable. His partner said, “Ah. A third-grader’s worst nightmare – death by Brussels sprouts.”

My thanks to all of you who’ve read my blog in 2009, and thanks also for your comments here and to me as @karenbartleson on Twitter. If you have a Brussels sprouts story or recipe, do tell!

I wish you and your loved ones a wonderful holiday season and a successful 2010!

I’m nearing the end of my series, “The 10 Commandments for Effective Standards”. Here is the 9th installment. It looks at how the standardization process can be accelerated and how standards can have a better chance of being adopted by industry.

The 9th Commandment for Effective Standards is: Start With Donations, Not From Scratch.

In the fast-paced EDA industry, spending too many years producing a standard can cause the standard to be pretty much obsolete by the time it’s finished. A sure way to speed up the standards process is to start with donations of already-proven formats, technology, and methods. Creating a foundation for a standard with techniques that have been shown to be useful gives a working committee a big head start. It also means that bugs or limitations may have already been addressed, lightening the load for the committee.

It’s important for the working committee – and its parent organization –  to allow donations to come from more than one source. Limiting contributions to a single company can be met with skepticism. It can also make committee members suspicious that a single company’s agenda is being pushed or that the standardization process isn’t open.

Of course, if a single solution is so elegant and welcomed by the committee that it’s not interested in other donations, it’s fine to proceed. However, this sense should be widely accepted, and committee members shouldn’t be blocked from making donations if they wish to.

On the other hand, if only one donation is made and no other donations are forthcoming, it could indicate that there’s no real need for a standard. In this case, even if much time and effort are put into producing the standard, it could end up sitting on a shelf, unadopted.

Donations can be made in a variety of ways, and established standards-setting and standards-development organizations have policies governing them. At times, owners can contribute their solutions through licensing schemes, but it’s critical that the terms be reasonable and non-discriminatory. Also known as RAND terms, this insures that all interested parties will have access to the standard for use in their products and services.

I know that some industries have to create standards from scratch before products can be developed. Yet, in my industry I’ve found that donations of proven technology result in highly effective standards.

I like the new model for IEEE-SA corporate membership. I like it so much that I was one of the first to sign up, enrolling Synopsys for an advanced membership. As an advanced member, Synopsys employees can participate in an unlimited number of corporate (entity-based) standards projects without paying additional project fees. We’re saving money, our budgeting is simpler, and our engineers no longer have to justify the project fees to their managers.

Articles about the new model can be found on EETimes, Urgent Communications, and Gabe on EDA. The articles describe the model, explain why the change was made, and highlight the benefits of the entity-based standards process. What you won’t read about in these articles is the effort that went into developing, proposing, and obtaining approval for the new membership model.

When the IEEE Standards Association’s governing committees have a problem to solve or a project to undertake, they create task forces to do the work. Called “ad hoc committees”, the task forces are comprised of volunteers who serve on the governance committees and IEEE-SA staff members to support them. The ad hoc committees develop solutions or tackle projects, then seek recommendations and approvals from the higher authority governing committees.

One such ad hoc committee was formed when the IEEE-SA’s Corporate Advisory Group (CAG) recognized that the original corporate membership model might be a limiting factor in starting new entity-based standards projects. Chaired by Dennis Brophy, this ad hoc spent a couple of years creating and adjusting proposals that would meet the needs of corporate members as well as the IEEE-SA itself. The membership model had to be cost-effective, have distinct benefits, and be enticing for corporations and other entities. It also needed to be non-disruptive to the IEEE-SA’s policies and finances. Several iterations were required before the model satisfied the stakeholders. Dennis and his ad hoc’s members stayed persistent and encouraged throughout.

It’s good to see the fruits of the ad hoc committee’s labor. And even better to taste them.