Re: Does standardisation assume interoperability?

Hi,

I don´t know if the following example makes sense to this discussion. But
it comes to my mind.

Analog television has some different standards as, for example, PAL and
NTSC, and they are not interoperable.

I don´t know if, in this case, the term should be compatible.

Best,
Laufer


2014-08-08 11:43 GMT-03:00 Lee, Deirdre <Deirdre.Lee@deri.org>:

>  Hi,
>
>
>
> We had a good call today, addressing many of the raised issues for UCR.
> One issue that we felt warranted more discussion was *ISSUE-23: Review
> definition of interoperability*
> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/23
>
>
>
> The following questions were raised: Does standardisation imply
> interoperability? Are there cases where data uses standards, but is not
> interoperable? Can interoperability be achieved independent of
> standardisation? In DWBP, should we have a specific definition of
> interoperability?
>
>
>
> In the UCR, there are the following two requirements:
>
> ·         R-MetadataInteroperable
>
> ·         R-LicenseInteroperable
>
>
>
> And also
>
> ·         R-MetadataMachineRead
>
> ·         R-MetadataStandardized
>
>
>
> ·         R-LicenseMachineRead
>
> ·         R-LicenseStandardized
>
>
>
> Possible resolutions for the UCR could be:
>
> a.       Remove R–MetadataInteroperable and R-LicenseInteroperable from
> UCR because they’re redundant
>
> b.      Improve description of R-MetadataStandardized and
> R-LicenseStandardized
>
> c.       Other?
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Deirdre
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Deirdre Lee
>
> Research Associate
>
> eGovernment Domain (DEG)
>
> Insight-NUIG
>
> IDA BusinessPark, Lower Dangan,
>
> Galway, Ireland
>
>
>
> deirdre.lee@deri.org
> skype: deirdrelee
>
> twitter: @deirdrelee
>
> linkedin: ie.linkedin.com/in/leedeirdre/
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>



-- 
.  .  .  .. .  .
.        .   . ..
.     ..       .