Re: sustainable swag

Deborah:
> 
> I must confess that I don't pay much 
> attention to standards these days
> (except for W3C pronouncements 
> ... and local building codes! ;-)
> mostly because of too many negative
> experiences with "mil-spec"
> (military specification) and 
> "mil-std" (military standard)
> documentation projects in the distant past.
> 
> I also tend to rebel against "universal" 
> rules & recommendations for
> documentation on principle, because 
> these bypass the rhetorical
> situation -- one of the 3 founding 
> concepts (purpose, audience,
> occasion/situation) in which I ground 
> every communications project I
> attempt.
> 
Agreed. Not that long ago, I had a vigorous discussion about the old
mil-standard brownie recipe on another list. My point, restated in your
rhetorical framework, was that if you considered the actual likely
rhetorical situation - a specification for an item that would be created by
tens of thousands, aimed at someone who was likely to built a factory to
create it, as part of a formal tendering process - then the recipe made a
lot of sense and answered questions that the ordinary baker in a domestic
kitchen would never have or be interested in. Taken out of that rhetorical
situation and circulated on the web as an amusement, the result was
laughable. My take on it: it was in plain language because it was
appropriate to its intended audience and use. 

> 
> But it's not fair for me to lump 
> mil-standards for depot-level
> maintenance manuals ... with mil-stds 
> for schematics and PC board
> layouts ... with ISO symbol standards 
> (which, BTW, I know nothing of
> at all).

VBG


> I'm curious if you think reform of 
> the process standard is possible?
> or even desirable?

They can be valuable if implemented thoughtfully and in the spirit, not
merely the letter, of the standard. I really got into ISO 9001, the quality
standard, when I took charge of a software team that was delivering very
poor quality software. We worked together within the spirit of the standard
(and with exactly one form, a single page headed 'action required' with, I
think I recall, about four boxes on it) and within a year or so a much
larger team was delivering software that approximated to defect-free. That
is, typically no defects were reported after installation - and the systems
were in daily use. (It's easy to deliver products with no reported defects
if no-one uses them).

Then I moved to a very large computer systems integrator, that drowned us
all in paperwork and where the whole quality system was certificated by an
outside inspection body, but was a millstone around all our necks. And what
they delivered was OK, but a long, long way from defect-free. 

I haven't tangled with ISO 14001 in the same way, partly because these
process standards really aren't aimed at the one-woman business.

> 
> ... Or do we just throw it out and 
> try some new, more flexible
> approach to public corroboration 
> and data-based consensus about
> "greening" our design practices?

Yes. For the one-person, or very small business, a personal charter or
manifesto is a much better way to go. A statement that says: these are my
principles, this is what I'm trying to achieve, and this is how I'm working
to achieve it. Ideally, refreshed occasionally with a report on what we've
done and why.

In theory, and without reading the standard closely, it's likely to be
possible to base such a personal charter on ISO 14001 - by translating the
latter into the new rhetorical situation. 

Only, it isn't going to be me that does that. Too many other things going
on!

Best
Caroline Jarrett
Twitter @cjforms
http://www.formsthatwork.com

___________________________________________________________________

Use the following address to post a message to all subscribers: 
 [email protected]

To subscribe, unsubscribe or change your options, visit:
 http://list.InformationDesign.org/mailman/listinfo/infodesign-cafe

For all Information Design matters:
 http://InformationDesign.org

Problems? Write to:
 [email protected]
___________________________________________________________________