Wired has an interesting article describing how industrial standards first 
came about 140 years ago in the machine tools industry, describing the 
debate over the rival standards for screw threads ("Whitworth" and 
"Sellers"):

"The two sides of a Whitworth thread formed an angle of 55 degrees, and its 
tip was rounded off at the top. The Sellers thread, by contrast, had a 60-
degree angle, but its apex was flattened.

These differences may sound minor, but in practical terms they were 
revolutionary. The 55-degree angle of Whitworth's screw was difficult to 
measure accurately without specially designed gauges. By contrast, 
Sellers' 60-degree thread - one angle of an equilateral triangle - could be 
measured with ease. Similarly, the rounded top of Whitworth threads made it 
more difficult to fit nuts and bolts together, since the threads often did 
not match perfectly. Flattening the threads made it easier to ensure that 
they locked into place with one another. Finally, producing a flat thread 
was something any machinist could do quickly and efficiently by himself. 
Building a Whitworth screw required "three kinds of cutters and two kinds 
of lathe," Sellers noted that night. His screw required just one cutter and 
one lathe."
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.01/standards_pr.html


Britain, however, had already standardized on the Whitworth design, and 
stayed with it until the lack of interoperability with American parts 
became obvious in World War II:

"Under the strain of desert warfare, British tanks and trucks broke down. 
Screws loosened. Bolts wore out. American factories were churning out 
vehicles and parts for the British. But when those supplies arrived in 
North Africa, everyone was surprised to discover that American nuts did not 
fit British bolts, and vice versa. The broken-down tanks stayed broken-
down.

American factories immediately retooled and, for the last three years of 
the war, ran two separate assembly lines, one to make British engines and 
weapons and another to make American engines and weapons. "


Mark Bierbeck ruminates this article and on the implications for 
innovation: 

"Of course standards don't stifle innovation. But standards that emerge 
from competition in the market at least imply that there is some underlying 
innovation demanding our attention. Today, market-driven innovation has 
given way to sanitised implementation - with industry being drip-fed 
technical advances from on high in the form of new standards."
http://www.spiked-online.com/Articles/00000002D42B.htm

Lots of food for thought here ... on the benefits of standardization, but 
on the perils of casting a standard in concrete before implementation 
experience is available ... and the horrible thought that "it seemed like a 
good idea at the time" decisions today could haunt our great-grandchildren.





-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org> , an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> 

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>