While it may be politically correct to agree to disagree sometimes we require agreement on standards.
We need standardization. Not because it is the ONLY RIGHT WAY to do anything. We need it because when things are done in a consistent fashion, multiple people can work on a project efficiently, because they know how things are put together. You could write a website using Java, Struts, Dot Net, Angular, MS MVC, Ajax, Bootstrap, Knockout, TypeScript, JavaScript and many other tools and utilities, all in a single application. It could be done. Could you imagine the nightmare that would emerge trying to figure out how something was put together with all of this noise going on? So, we need standardization.
One thing I have found over the years is that one standard doesn’t solve every problem. Also, we tend to have different systems to solve different problems. That being said, if each system is build with a consistent standard, that’s probably the best you are going to be able to do.
The thing I find the most comical is that we want standards to live forever. I once worked for a company that began using a mainframe system where everything was written in COBOL using ISAM files. That was the standard for 10 years. They later moved, in 1990 to PL1 using an IDMS database, still on the mainframe. Sure, they played with PC systems. But anything that carried the business was required to be on the mainframe. After five years an assessment was made, and the company moved to RPG on an AS400, using DB2 for the database. They remained on that platform for more than a decade until the business rolled up and died.
I’m not saying that any standard is dead. What I am saying is that some standards have a lifetime, because newer, more efficient ways are developed for creating systems that have all the the ABILITIES we require (reliability, maintainability, scalability…).
In my opinion, a standard should begin with a definite time of death. If we start out with a standard that is already dead, it allows us to move forward for a specific period of time without chaos. However, we know that there will automatically be a new standard defined, and when that will occur. Perhaps that standard life cycle could last for a product release. Perhaps it could be based on the calendar. Perhaps a standard may be extended in duration for practical reasons, such as there is no compelling replacement available.
The point is, we need to get away from this mindset that, “That’s how we always do it!” At the same time, we need to not have a mindset that says, “This is the only way to do it, so that we can be standardized!”
Let me close with an example of standards from the history of the United States of America. The founders of our country had many points on which they disagreed. However, they were able to agree on some standards for how our society interacts. They wrote the Constitution of the United States of America. It was not good enough. It had to be amended with the Bill of Rights, which extended the rights of US Citizens and the individual states. We started out with standards. In recognition that nothing stands still, the founders of the US constitution made provisions for additional amendments to be established as the needs of the union changed. There was, and still continues to be disagreement. However, it is the standards of our constitution, that when followed, brings sanity for action, and a voice for change.
Cheers,
Ben