Hubbry Logo
Software standardSoftware standardMain
Open search
Software standard
Community hub
Software standard
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Software standard
Software standard
Software standard
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

A software standard is a standard, protocol, or other common format of a document, file, or data transfer accepted and used by one or more software developers while working on one or more than one computer programs. Software standards enable interoperability between different programs created by different developers.

How it is used and applied

[edit]

Software standards consist of certain terms, concepts, data formats, document styles and techniques agreed upon by software creators so that their software can understand the files and data created by a different computer program. To be considered a standard, a certain protocol needs to be accepted and incorporated by a group of developers who contribute to the definition and maintenance of the standard.

Some developers prefer using standards for software development because of the efficiencies it provides for code development[1] and wider user acceptance and use of the resulting application.[2]

The protocols HTML, TCP/IP, SMTP, POP and FTP are examples of software standards that application designers must understand and follow if their software expects to interface with these standards. For instance, in order for an email sent using Microsoft Outlook to be read by someone using Yahoo! Mail, the email must be sent using the SMTP so that the recipient's software can understand and correctly parse and display the email. Without such a standardized protocol, two different software applications would be unable to accurately share and display the information delivered between each other.

Some other widely used data formats, while understood and used by a variety of computer programs, are not considered a software standard. Microsoft Office file formats, such as .doc and .xls, are commonly converted by other computer programs to use, but are still owned and controlled by Microsoft, unlike text files (TXT or RTF.[3])

Creation of a software standard

[edit]

Representatives from standards organizations, like W3C[4] and ISOC,[5] collaborate on how to make a unified software standard to ensure seamless communication between software applications. These organisations consist of groups of larger software companies like Microsoft and Apple Inc.

The complexity of a standard varies based on the specific problem it aims to address but it needs to remain simple, maintainable and understandable. The standard document must comprehensively outline various conditions, types, and elements to ensure practicality and fulfill its intended purpose. For instance, although both FTP (File Transfer Protocol) and SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) facilitate computer-to-computer communication, FTP specifically handles the exchange of files, while SMTP focuses on the transmission of emails.

Open versus closed standards

[edit]

A standard can be a closed standard or an open standard. The documentation for an open standard is open to the public and anyone can create a software that implements and uses the standard. The documentation and specification for closed standards are not available to the public, enabling its developer to sell and license the code to manage their data format to other interested software developers. While this process increases the revenue potential for a useful file format, it may limit acceptance and drive the adoption of a similar, open standard instead.[6]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Software standard

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A software standard is a document, established by consensus and approved by a recognized body, that provides, for common and repeated use, rules, guidelines, or characteristics for activities or their results in software engineering, aimed at the achievement of the optimum degree of order in a given context. These standards encompass specifications for software development processes, data formats, protocols, interfaces, and quality metrics, ensuring consistency across implementations by multiple developers or organizations. Software standards play a critical role in promoting interoperability, allowing diverse software systems and applications—built with different programming languages or frameworks—to exchange data and operate seamlessly together, which is essential for modern digital ecosystems like and the . They also enhance and reliability by establishing best practices for life cycle , testing, , and verification, thereby reducing defects and facilitating . Furthermore, adherence to these standards lowers development and integration costs, accelerates time-to-market, and mitigates risks associated with proprietary or incompatible solutions, benefiting industries from to healthcare. Key organizations involved in developing software standards include the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), often collaborating on joint standards like ISO/IEC/IEEE 12207, which defines processes for the software life cycle. Prominent examples encompass ISO/IEC 25010 for software product quality models, which outlines characteristics such as functionality, performance efficiency, and security; ISO/IEC/IEEE 29119-3 for software test documentation; and POSIX (IEEE 1003.1) for portable operating system interfaces, enabling software portability across Unix-like systems. These standards evolve through international consensus to address emerging technologies, ensuring they remain relevant in an increasingly interconnected world.

Fundamentals

Definition

A software standard is a document, established by consensus and approved by a recognized body, that provides, for common and repeated use, rules, guidelines, or characteristics for activities or their results in software engineering, aimed at the achievement of the optimum degree of order in a given context. These standards encompass guidelines, protocols, and specifications that define how software systems exchange data, communicate, and operate together, thereby promoting compatibility—the capability of two or more systems or components to exchange information and perform their required functions while sharing the same hardware or software environment—and interoperability, the ability of two or more systems or components to exchange information and to use the information that has been exchanged. By establishing verifiable rules, software standards enhance reliability across diverse implementations, reducing errors and inconsistencies in software behavior. Key characteristics of software standards include their documented nature, verifiability through precise and complete specifications, and applicability to multiple independent implementations without proprietary restrictions in their core form. A specification, as the foundational element, is a document that prescribes, in a complete, precise, and verifiable manner, the requirements, design, behavior, or other characteristics of a software system or component, often including procedures to confirm compliance. These standards typically incorporate elements such as syntax rules for data exchange, standardized data formats like JSON (a lightweight data-interchange format based on a subset of JavaScript) or XML (a markup language for encoding documents in a format readable by both humans and machines), application programming interfaces (APIs) that outline interaction methods, and performance benchmarks to evaluate aspects like efficiency and reliability. For instance, JSON ensures structured data portability across applications, while XML supports extensible document representation. The scope of software standards extends to various domains, including programming languages (e.g., the syntax and semantics of languages like C defined by ISO), file formats (e.g., portable document formats), network protocols (e.g., TCP/IP for reliable data transmission), and user interfaces (e.g., accessibility guidelines for web content). Unlike informal best practices, which are advisory recommendations without binding consensus, or vendor-specific guidelines that limit adoption to proprietary ecosystems, software standards are formally agreed-upon and designed for broad, independent conformance. A fundamental prerequisite is interoperability, enabling diverse software from different developers to exchange and utilize data seamlessly without requiring custom adaptations or intermediaries. Early examples, such as the ASCII character encoding standard for text representation, illustrate this foundational role in ensuring consistent data handling across systems.

Historical Development

The development of software standards originated in the late 1950s amid rapid proliferation of diverse computing hardware from manufacturers like , , and , which created significant fragmentation in and data interchange. To mitigate this, the U.S. Department of Defense convened a committee in 1959 to design (Common Business-Oriented Language), a intended for applications that could execute across incompatible machines without major rewrites. Shortly thereafter, in 1963, the American Standards Association (ASA, now ANSI) released the initial ASCII (American Standard Code for Information Interchange) specification to establish a uniform 7-bit encoding for characters, enabling reliable text and between disparate systems. These early efforts marked the transition from ad-hoc, vendor-specific solutions to formalized standards addressing core compatibility challenges in emerging computing ecosystems. Key milestones in the 1970s through 1990s reflected growing needs for operating system and network interoperability as computing scaled globally. In the Unix domain, the (Portable Operating System Interface) standard—formalized as IEEE Std 1003.1-1988—emerged to unify application programming interfaces across Unix variants, allowing software to port seamlessly between implementations from different vendors. Concurrently, the TCP/IP protocol suite was specified in 1981 via RFC 791 (IP) and RFC 793 (TCP), providing a robust, layered framework for that the U.S. Department of Defense adopted as its standard in 1982, laying the foundation for the modern internet. The 1990s brought web-focused advancements, with publicly proposing (HyperText Markup Language) in 1991 as a simple markup system for hyperlinked documents, which the newly formed (W3C) began standardizing in subsequent years. The 2000s accelerated a shift toward open formats amid rising open-source adoption, highlighted by the OpenDocument Format (ODF), an XML-based standard for office documents approved by OASIS in May 2005 and ratified by ISO/IEC as standard 26300 in November 2006, enabling vendor-neutral exchange of word processing, spreadsheets, and presentations. This evolutionary trajectory was propelled by responses to , where proprietary technologies trapped users in closed ecosystems, limiting innovation and mobility; the of computing, which necessitated cross-border data flows and multi-vendor integration; and regulatory imperatives, such as the European Union's E-Commerce Directive (2000/31/EC), which achieved political agreement in December 1999 and formal adoption in June 2000 to harmonize online services and implicitly bolster standardization for a unified digital market. Antitrust interventions further catalyzed change, notably the 1998 U.S. v. lawsuit, settled in 2001, which required the company to disclose APIs and protocols, promoting and curbing monopolistic barriers to standards compliance. Overall, these drivers facilitated a progression from proprietary, siloed models to collaborative frameworks, enhancing software's scalability and accessibility.

Types

Open Standards

Open standards in software refer to publicly available specifications for interfaces, formats, protocols, or data structures that are developed and maintained through an open process, allowing anyone to implement them without restrictions such as royalties or discriminatory licensing. According to the (W3C), key principles include royalty-free patent licensing, where implementers are not required to pay fees, an open and transparent development process involving public participation, and consensus-based decision-making to ensure broad agreement among stakeholders. These criteria ensure that open standards are accessible to developers, organizations, and users worldwide, fostering without favoring any single entity. The advantages of open standards lie in their ability to promote innovation by enabling diverse implementations and integrations across ecosystems, while reducing development costs through shared resources and avoiding . For instance, the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP), standardized by the (IETF) in 1996 as RFC 1945, has become the foundation of the web, allowing seamless communication between servers and clients from multiple vendors and ensuring long-term viability as no single company controls its evolution. Similarly, the Portable Document Format (PDF), initially proprietary to but opened and standardized by the (ISO) in 2008 as ISO 32000-1, exemplifies how transitioning to openness enhances accessibility and prevents obsolescence, with widespread adoption in document exchange. In contrast to closed standards, open ones prioritize collaborative maintenance to sustain relevance over time. Governance of open standards is typically handled by international consortia or standards bodies that facilitate collaborative development, such as the W3C for web technologies or the IETF for internet protocols, incorporating public review periods for feedback and rigorous to track changes and ensure . These organizations employ working groups composed of experts from industry, academia, and the public to draft, refine, and publish specifications, often under formal processes that include testing. Metrics of openness are assessed through the use of permissive licenses for reference implementations, such as the Apache License 2.0, which allows free modification and distribution without patent encumbrances, and explicit commitments to avoid claims that could hinder adoption. This approach reflects a historical shift toward , influenced by the establishment of the in 1985, which advocated for freely modifiable software and standards to counter restrictions, laying groundwork for movements that pressured industries to release specifications publicly.

Closed Standards

Closed standards, also known as standards, refer to specifications for software formats, protocols, or interfaces that are controlled exclusively by a single company or a limited , often requiring licensing fees, nondisclosure agreements (NDAs), or other restrictions for access and implementation. Unlike collaborative models, these standards prioritize the owner's rights, allowing unilateral modifications without broader consensus, which can foster tailored ecosystem development but also limit widespread adoption. A key principle is the emphasis on exclusivity to protect competitive advantages, where the controlling entity retains full authority over evolution, compatibility, and distribution. Prominent examples include Microsoft's legacy . file format, used in Word versions from 1997 to 2003, which employed a binary structure embedding program-specific data, restricting third-party until specifications were later disclosed. Another is Adobe's Flash technology, a platform for web content that operated as a closed standard under Adobe's sole control, requiring proprietary plugins and licensing for developers until its discontinuation. These cases illustrate how closed standards can dominate markets—such as .DOC in or Flash in web —yet face challenges from restricted access. Closed standards offer advantages like accelerated for the owning entity, as internal teams can iterate rapidly without external coordination, enabling features aligned with the vendor's and generating through licensing. However, drawbacks are significant: they often lead to , where users become dependent on the owner's products due to incompatibility with alternatives, increasing switching costs and stifling competition. Additionally, the risk of obsolescence is high, as unilateral decisions can render the standard irrelevant if market preferences shift, exemplified by Flash's decline amid security vulnerabilities and resistance from platforms like Apple's , which banned it in 2010. Incompatibility further exacerbates issues, limiting cross-platform use and hindering broader software . Enforcement of closed standards relies on intellectual property mechanisms such as patents to protect novel technical elements, copyrights to safeguard the specification documents themselves, and certification programs to ensure compliant implementations. For instance, patents allow owners to license access selectively, while copyrights prevent unauthorized reproduction of format details. Certification, like Apple's App Store guidelines, mandates adherence to proprietary APIs and review processes, rejecting non-compliant apps to maintain ecosystem integrity and security. Transition cases demonstrate how closed standards may evolve toward openness under market or regulatory pressure. In the Microsoft antitrust era of the late 1990s and early 2000s, scrutiny over proprietary practices prompted the company to publish detailed for its Office binary formats, including .DOC, in 2008 as part of interoperability commitments, facilitating third-party support and reducing lock-in concerns. Similarly, Adobe's Flash transitioned to open alternatives like HTML5 after its 2020 end-of-life, driven by industry-wide adoption of web standards to avoid proprietary dependencies. These shifts highlight how antitrust actions and technological convergence can compel owners to release specifications, promoting compatibility while mitigating risks of isolation.

Development Process

Creation Stages

The creation of software standards typically follows a structured, multi-stage aimed at addressing specific technical needs while ensuring broad consensus and reliability. The begins with problem identification, where gaps in , functionality, or security are assessed to justify the need for a new standard. For instance, issues between diverse software systems often prompt this initial evaluation. Following identification, drafting specifications occurs through technical working groups that define precise requirements, including protocols, data formats, and implementation guidelines. These groups collaborate to produce initial drafts, incorporating input from experts to outline core functionalities. The next phase involves review and testing, encompassing public feedback mechanisms, prototypes, and iterative revisions to validate the draft's feasibility and correctness. Prototypes help demonstrate practical application, while feedback ensures alignment with real-world needs. Ratification then proceeds via formal voting or approval procedures, culminating in official publication of the standard. This stage confirms consensus among stakeholders before the document becomes authoritative. Finally, maintenance addresses ongoing updates, errata corrections, and revisions to adapt to evolving technologies or identified issues. This ensures the standard remains relevant over time. Common tools and methods in this process include (RFCs) for iterative community review, as used by the (IETF), and electronic ballots for voting, as employed by the (ISO). The overall duration typically ranges from 1 to 5 years, with ISO processes averaging about 3 years from proposal to publication. Key considerations during creation include balancing innovation—through timely adoption of new technologies—with stability to avoid disrupting existing implementations. Ensuring is essential, as standards must evolve without breaking prior versions to maintain across legacy and new systems. Security integration has gained prominence since the 2014 vulnerability, which exposed flaws in cryptographic implementations and underscored the need for robust security reviews in standards development. Output formats are formalized as comprehensive documents, such as , featuring normative sections that define mandatory requirements and informative annexes providing explanatory or supplementary material.

Involved Organizations

The development and maintenance of software standards involve a diverse array of international bodies that establish global frameworks for . (ISO) and the (IEC) collaborate through their Joint Technical Committee 1 (JTC 1), which focuses on information technology standards, including data representation and programming languages. For instance, JTC 1, through its Subcommittee 7 (SC 7) on Systems and , oversees standards like ISO/IEC/IEEE 12207 for software life cycle processes, developed in collaboration with the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), ensuring in software applications worldwide. Complementing this, the (ITU), a agency, develops standards for telecommunications protocols that underpin software in networked environments, such as those related to data transmission and signaling. Web and internet-focused organizations play a pivotal role in standardizing protocols and markup languages essential for online software ecosystems. The (W3C), established in 1994 by at MIT, develops and promotes web standards, including specifications for and CSS that define document structure and styling in web browsers. Similarly, the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), formed in 1986, operates through open working groups to define core internet protocols, such as those for IP addressing and routing, enabling reliable software communication across global networks. Industry consortia provide agile platforms for collaborative standard development, often targeting specific software domains. The Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS), a non-profit consortium founded in 1993, advances open standards for XML-based technologies, facilitating data exchange in systems. Ecma International, an industry association established in 1961, standardizes information and communication technologies, notably through ECMA-262, which defines the scripting language used in . National and regional organizations ensure alignment between global standards and local requirements, adapting them to jurisdictional needs. , the (ANSI), a private non-profit founded in 1918, coordinates the U.S. voluntary standards system and accredits developers, including those for practices, while representing U.S. interests in international bodies like ISO. In Europe, the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), established in 1988, develops standards for ICT, including software protocols for telecommunications, and harmonizes them with EU regulations to balance regional innovation with global compatibility. These organizations frequently collaborate to streamline , avoiding duplication and enhancing adoption. For example, the IETF and ISO/IEC JTC 1 employ fast-track procedures to mutually recognize and adopt specifications, as outlined in cooperative agreements that expedite the integration of protocols into international standards. Similarly, ITU-T and ISO/IEC JTC 1 maintain liaison relationships to align on overlapping areas like network software protocols, fostering consensus through joint working groups and .

Applications

Usage in Software Ecosystems

Software standards facilitate integration across various stages of software ecosystems, including development, deployment, and runtime environments. In development, standards ensure compliance in application programming interfaces (APIs) for , allowing independent services to communicate seamlessly through defined protocols like OpenAPI for RESTful designs. This modularity supports agile architectures where services such as user authentication and payment processing can evolve without disrupting the overall system. During deployment, container standards from the (OCI) define formats and runtimes, enabling consistent packaging and execution of applications across diverse platforms, as seen in the OCI Runtime and Image Specifications that allow tools like Docker and to interoperate. At runtime, standards promote operating system portability by specifying common APIs, shells, and utilities, ensuring applications run reliably on systems without modification. Within software ecosystems, these standards yield key benefits by enabling , third-party integration, and . Modular design is enhanced through reusable components governed by standards, which increase and reduce development costs by allowing modules to be developed, tested, and deployed independently. Third-party integration becomes straightforward, as standardized interfaces permit external developers to contribute or extend systems without proprietary lock-in, fostering collaborative ecosystems. For , standards like those in RESTful APIs using HTTP protocols support stateless operations with uniform methods (e.g., GET, ), distributing loads across servers and accommodating growth in web services without architectural overhauls. Compliance with software standards is achieved through structured mechanisms such as certification testing, conformance suites, and auditing tools. Certification testing verifies that implementations meet specification requirements via formal validation processes, often involving independent test laboratories to issue conformance certificates. Conformance suites, like those developed by the W3C for , provide comprehensive test cases to assess rendering, scripting, and features against the specification, ensuring browser and tool interoperability. Auditing tools automate compliance checks by mapping controls to standards, generating reports, and monitoring deviations in real-time to maintain ecosystem-wide adherence. Software standards significantly impact s by reducing fragmentation in domains like and IoT. In cloud computing, standardized APIs such as those in provide a unified RESTful interface for compute, storage, and networking services, minimizing and enabling multi-cloud portability across deployments. This standardization addresses management complexities in telco clouds by promoting consistent orchestration, thereby lowering integration costs and operational silos. In IoT, protocols like , an OASIS standard, mitigate fragmentation through lightweight, publish-subscribe messaging that supports bi-directional communication and quality-of-service levels, allowing diverse devices from multiple vendors to integrate into unified networks with minimal overhead.

Notable Examples

One prominent example in web standards is , developed by the (W3C) and finalized as a recommendation in October 2014. This standard introduced native support for multimedia elements like video and audio, as well as APIs for graphics () and real-time communication (), enabling developers to create rich, interactive websites without proprietary plugins. By standardizing these features, HTML5 achieved cross-browser consistency, reducing development fragmentation and allowing seamless rendering across major browsers like Chrome, , and . In data formats, (JavaScript Object Notation), first specified by in 2001 and formalized as the ECMA-404 standard in 2013, serves as a lightweight alternative to XML for data interchange. Unlike XML's verbose tag-based structure, JSON uses simple key-value pairs and arrays, making it more compact and easier to parse, particularly in web APIs where bandwidth efficiency is critical. This has led to its widespread use in ful services, with major platforms like APIs from and adopting it for faster data transmission. Programming interfaces exemplify standards for hardware-software integration, such as the USB (Universal Serial Bus) software stack defined in the USB 1.0 specification released by the USB Implementers Forum (USB-IF) in January 1996. This stack outlines the host controller driver model, device enumeration protocols, and class drivers, facilitating plug-and-play connectivity for peripherals like keyboards and storage devices without custom hardware reconfiguration. Similarly, (Portable Operating System Interface), standardized as IEEE Std 1003.1-1988, promotes portability of applications by defining common APIs for processes, file systems, and threads. Adopted by operating systems including and macOS, POSIX ensures software written for one compliant system runs with minimal changes on others, enhancing developer productivity across diverse environments. A modern example is (Wasm), advanced to W3C recommendation status in December 2019, which enables near-native performance for web applications by compiling languages like C++ and to a binary instruction format executable in browsers. This allows computationally intensive tasks, such as or inference, to run efficiently client-side, with support integrated into all major browsers (Chrome, , , Edge) by 2020. Its impacts include powering tools like in the browser and game engines via Unity, expanding the web's capabilities beyond JavaScript limitations. These standards demonstrate success through high adoption rates; for instance, the protocol—standardized via TLS specifications from the IETF—reached 96–99% of browsing time across Chrome platforms as of January 2025, driven by browser enforcement and certificate authorities like post-2015. Overall, such metrics highlight how standardized software interfaces foster and in global ecosystems.

Challenges and Future Directions

Key Challenges

One major technical hurdle in software standards is version fragmentation, exemplified by the "" of the 1990s and early 2000s, where competing implementations of and related technologies by major vendors like and led to inconsistent rendering and developer challenges prior to the unification efforts culminating in HTML5. This fragmentation arises from proprietary extensions and divergent interpretations of standards, complicating interoperability and increasing development costs. Backward incompatibility further exacerbates these issues, as evolving standards often require significant refactoring of legacy systems, disrupting seamless upgrades. A prominent case is , standardized in 1998 by the (IETF), which introduced a 128-bit addressing scheme to address IPv4 exhaustion but faced slow adoption due to its inherent complexity, including the need for dual-stack configurations that add 30-50% overhead to network setups and incompatibility with legacy hardware supporting only 15-20% of industrial IoT devices. Despite these advancements, remains limited, with large-scale migrations taking 5-7 years even for telecom giants like , hindered by reliance on workarounds like (NAT). Adoption barriers compound these technical issues, including resistance from firms that leverage sponsor lock-in to favor technologies over neutral standards, deadlocking consensus in development groups and prioritizing their market dominance. For small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), high implementation costs—encompassing upfront investments, maintenance, and training—pose a disproportionate burden, often exceeding perceived benefits and leading to delayed or incomplete adoption of standards like those in Industry 4.0 protocols. Additionally, "standards fatigue" emerges from the proliferation of overlapping specifications across domains such as cybersecurity, where organizations grapple with redundant frameworks like ISO 27001 and NIST, resulting in resource strain and inconsistent compliance efforts. Social and economic obstacles include patent thickets, dense clusters of overlapping intellectual property rights that block open standards by creating navigation uncertainties, high litigation risks, and royalty stacking for implementers. In software, broad and abstract patents—such as Amazon's "1-click" purchasing method (US Patent 5,960,411) or Blackboard's e-learning processes (US Patent 6,988,138)—exemplify how these thickets stifle innovation by deterring adoption and encouraging defensive patenting rather than collaboration. Geopolitical tensions, particularly the US-China tech divide post-2018, further complicate matters, as China's state-driven standardization via initiatives like Made in China 2025 has led to increased submissions of proposals in bodies like ITU and 3GPP, often criticized by the US for quality issues and security risks, such as Huawei's 385 contributions to 5G standards amid espionage concerns. This rivalry manifests in barriers like exclusionary technical committees in China (e.g., TC260 on information security) and Western countermeasures through alliances like the EU-US Trade and Technology Council, fragmenting global standards alignment. Enforcing software standards presents measurement challenges, particularly the absence of universal compliance testing frameworks, which relies heavily on manual processes prone to errors, misconfigurations, and misinterpretations of diverse regulatory sources. Human factors amplify this, with insider negligence accounting for 56% of software attacks and gaps between developers and compliance experts leading to behavioral noncompliance driven by and inadequate training (affecting 48-54% of employees). Without standardized tools for automated verification, organizations face visibility issues and inconsistent , especially in dynamic environments like bring-your-own-device (BYOD) setups, underscoring the need for integrated policies like Security Education, Training, and Awareness () programs. In recent years, the integration of (AI) and (ML) into software ecosystems has driven the evolution of standards focused on model interoperability and portability. The (ONNX) format, initially released in 2017 by the ONNX Steering Committee comprising major tech firms including , , and Amazon, serves as a pivotal for representing ML models across diverse frameworks such as , , and Caffe2. Updates in 2023, including version 1.15.0 which enhanced support for new operators and improved runtime optimizations, have further solidified ONNX's role in enabling seamless model deployment on edge devices and cloud platforms, reducing and accelerating AI adoption. This trend reflects a broader push toward standardized AI pipelines, with ONNX now supporting over 200 operators and facilitating hybrid model training in production environments. Parallel to AI advancements, decentralized technologies and have spurred standards for enhanced web , particularly in applications. The (W3C) published Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs) v1.0 as a W3C Recommendation in July 2022, defining a URI scheme and data model for self-sovereign digital identities that operate without centralized authorities. DIDs enable across networks, supporting use cases like secure in (DeFi) and supply chain tracking, with numerous method specifications registered for various ledger technologies. This standard promotes privacy-preserving identity management, allowing users to control their data while ensuring compatibility with emerging protocols. Sustainability concerns have elevated green software standards, emphasizing energy-efficient practices to mitigate the environmental impact of . ISO/IEC 30134-7:2023 specifies the cooling efficiency ratio (CER) as a key for data centers, quantifying energy use in thermal management to promote resource-efficient that supports sustainable software operations. Complementing this, the broader ISO/IEC 30134 series, including updates in 2023 for metrics like , addresses carbon footprints by guiding software developers toward low-energy algorithms and optimized codebases, with adoption driven by reporting mandates. These standards align with global environmental goals, such as reducing IT-related electricity use projected to account for up to 6-8% of global electricity by 2030, depending on efficiency measures. The advent of quantum computing and edge devices is prompting standards for resilient cryptography and distributed systems. The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) is advancing post-quantum cryptography through protocols like TLS 1.3 extensions, informed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)'s 2024 migration guidelines in IR 8547, which outline hybrid schemes combining classical and quantum-resistant algorithms like CRYSTALS-Kyber and CRYSTALS-Dilithium. NIST finalized three core post-quantum encryption standards in August 2024, urging organizations to inventory quantum-vulnerable systems and prioritize migration by 2035 to safeguard software against "harvest now, decrypt later" threats. For edge computing, these efforts extend to lightweight implementations, ensuring secure data processing in resource-constrained environments like IoT networks. Global harmonization of standards is accelerating in , particularly for and emerging networks, influenced by regulatory frameworks from bodies like the (ITU). The 3rd Generation Partnership Project () Release 20, with work initiated in 2025, unifies 5G-Advanced features with initial studies, standardizing terahertz use and AI-native network slicing to enable seamless global roaming and sharing. This release addresses 2020s regulatory pushes, such as the EU's Digital Decade targets and FCC auctions, by promoting interoperable APIs for cross-border services, with over 100 new specifications enhancing reliability for applications like autonomous vehicles. Such trends foster a unified ecosystem, reducing fragmentation and supporting scalable deployment worldwide.

References

  1. https://asq.org/quality-resources/standards-101
  2. https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/24765/6800/
  3. https://aws.amazon.com/what-is/interoperability/
  4. https://webstore.ansi.org/industry/software
  5. https://www.computer.org/publications/tech-news/trends/importance-of-interoperability
  6. https://www.iso.org/standard/79429.html
  7. https://www.iso.org/standard/71952.html
  8. https://www.osdata.com/programming/history/historylanguages.html
  9. https://learn.sparkfun.com/tutorials/ascii/history
  10. https://www.opengroup.org/austin/papers/backgrounder.html
  11. https://www.garykessler.net/library/tcpip.html
  12. https://www.w3.org/People/Raggett/book4/ch02.html
  13. https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=office
  14. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/archive-e-commerce-directive-what-happened-and-its-adoption
  15. https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/management/microsoft-antitrust-case/
  16. https://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia/term/proprietary-standards
  17. https://www.4ipcouncil.com/research/proprietary-vs-open-standards
  18. https://openstandards.nz/example-standards
  19. https://www.loc.gov/preservation/digital/formats/fdd/fdd000509.shtml
  20. https://helpx.adobe.com/enterprise/kb/eol-adobe-flash-shockwave-player.html
  21. https://apigician.com/vendor-lock-in-the-dangers-of-over-dependence-on-proprietary-systems/
  22. https://arapackelaw.com/patents/software-intellectual-property-rights/
  23. https://cpl.thalesgroup.com/software-monetization/software-copyright-guide
  24. https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/
  25. https://damieng.com/blog/2008/02/18/microsoft-opens-office-binary-file-format-specifications/
  26. https://www.iso.org/stages-and-resources-for-standards-development.html
  27. https://www.ietf.org/process/process/
  28. https://www.iso.org/developing-standards.html
  29. https://labs.apnic.net/index.php/2020/08/25/the-making-of-an-rfc-in-todays-ietf/
  30. https://devopedia.org/backward-compatibility
  31. https://cybersymbiosis.com/2023/07/28/a-decade-after-heartbleed/
  32. https://www.iso.org/sites/directives/current/part2/index.xhtml
  33. https://www.iso.org/committee/45020.html
  34. https://www.iso.org/standard/63712.html
  35. https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/12207/5672/
  36. https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/studygroups/com17/ict/Pages/ict-part01.aspx
  37. https://www.w3.org/standards/
  38. https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/IETF-Internet-Engineering-Task-Force
  39. https://www.oasis-open.org/
  40. https://ecma-international.org/home/
  41. https://www.ansi.org/
  42. https://www.etsi.org/
  43. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc3563/
  44. https://www.itu.int/rec/dologin_pub.asp?lang=e&id=T-REC-A.23-201406-I%21AnnA%21PDF-E&type=items
  45. https://intellias.com/api-standardization/
  46. https://opencontainers.org/
  47. https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799.orig/
  48. https://www.semi.org/en/Standards/ctr_036492
  49. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/omb/procurement/guidance/modular-approaches-for-information-technology.pdf
  50. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/architecture/best-practices/api-design
  51. https://www.w3.org/QA/2002/01/Note-qa-certif-20020102.html
  52. https://www.w3.org/TR/2018/SPSD-html5-20180327/
  53. https://docs.openstack.org/api-guide/compute/general_info.html
  54. https://omdia.tech.informa.com/om119897/industry-must-address-the-management-complexities-and-fragmentation-challenges-of-telco-cloud
  55. https://mqtt.org/
  56. https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/CR-html5-20140204/single-page.html
  57. https://www.w3.org/press-releases/2014/html5-rec/
  58. https://ecma-international.org/publications-and-standards/standards/ecma-404/
  59. https://ecma-international.org/wp-content/uploads/ECMA-404_2nd_edition_december_2017.pdf
  60. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8259
  61. https://ethw.org/w/images/4/44/USB_1.0_Specification.pdf
  62. https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/FIPS/fipspub151-1.pdf
  63. https://www.w3.org/2019/12/pressrelease-wasm-rec.html.en
  64. https://webassembly.org/
  65. https://transparencyreport.google.com/https/overview?hl=en
  66. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160791X2100004X
  67. https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=142419
  68. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/idx/j/jep/3336451.0014.103/--why-standardization-efforts-fail?rgn=main%3Bview=fulltext
  69. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/20/5807
  70. https://www.isaca.org/resources/news-and-trends/isaca-now-blog/2025/practical-strategies-to-overcome-cyber-security-compliance-standards-fatigue
  71. https://script-ed.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/6-2-Ballardini.pdf
  72. https://www.diplomacy.edu/resource/report-the-geopolitics-of-digital-standards-chinas-role-in-standard-setting-organisations/
  73. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167404822003777
  74. https://onnx.ai/
  75. https://onnx.ai/news.html
  76. https://www.w3.org/TR/did-core/
  77. https://www.w3.org/TR/did-extensions-methods/
  78. https://www.iso.org/standard/80493.html
  79. https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-and-ai/energy-demand-from-ai
  80. https://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/ir/8547/ipd
  81. https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2024/08/nist-releases-first-3-finalized-post-quantum-encryption-standards
  82. https://www.3gpp.org/specifications-technologies/releases/release-20
  83. https://www.qualcomm.com/news/onq/2025/06/3gpp-release-20-completing-5g-advanced-evolution-preparing-for-global-6g-standardization
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.