Vol.11 no.3 2019

Commentary : Contributing to the SpaceWire international standard (H. HIHARA et al.)−151−Synthesiology - English edition Vol.11 No.3 (2018) in the SpW WG that is an observer’s place and may give his opinions, but the actor does not engage in activities such as prototype making when it is in the observer’s place. That is, it seems that the authority in establishing international standards is controlled by gathering and limiting the congurator’s input to the observer’s output. The aforementioned TC corresponds to the congurator’s place, and only those selected within Europe can participate. Here, the observer’s reports and standard proposals are screened. The observer’s place has the authority to propose but does not have the authority to establish the standard. The authority to establish the standard is held by the TC or the congurator’s place. This is shown in Fig. 4. In Fig. 4, the members are shown in rectangular boxes with sharp corners, while the places are shown as rectangles with rounded corners.The reason why the observer’s and congurator’s places are separated is because the standard proposals are compiled after conducting adjustments within Europe. Manufacturing and specication settings are structurally separated, and the participants of the observer’s and congurator’s places have low awareness of being the actors. For example, in cases in which personnel from industrial vendors take roles of the observer or the congurator, it often happens that they must move to other organizations.4.3 Behavioral pattern of participants from USAThere is no clear hierarchical awareness for the observer, the congurator, and the actor among the participants from the USA. The observer acts on the subject as the actor and expects quick feedback. Also, they expect the SpW WG, which was originally set up to be in the observer’s place, to have the mindset of the configurator, and to directly make standard proposals. That is, they are not aware of the limitations of the observer’s place. While the authority and the role of the TC as being in the configurator’s place are recognized, they think it is possible for the actor to directly propose in establishing standards at the configurator’s place. They propose specs gathered through the actor’s performance in the market to be used as international standard specications, and therefore, expect discussions on considering them as de facto standards. This means that the information between the actor and the congurator ows in both directions. This is shown in Fig. 5. The bidirectional arrow between the actor and the configurator, as shown in this figure, does not match the behavior pattern of the European participants in Fig. 4. That is, this model shows that the behavior pattern of American participants is not accepted in Europe.While the hierarchy of the observer, the congurator, and the actor not being separated is similar to the Japanese behavior pattern, it is not uncommon that the observer and the congurator share common interests as actors. In such cases, the Japanese participants tend not to be able to compete, but the Europeans consider the WG Committee as the observer’s place, and here, the proposal of specs based on existing performances as international standards or as the de facto standard is not accepted. For the Japanese participants, it can be thought that this is an opportunity given to objectively state their opinion.4.4 Behavior pattern of Japanese participantsJapan has a setup of establishing Japanese standards through the supervision of JAXA. In the establishment of the SpaceWire standard, there is no clear division of labor as in the European example of SpW WG that corresponds to the observer’s place or the ECSS that corresponds to the configurator’s place. Instead, a design standard working group is set up as the configurator’s place for standard establishment. The congurator’s place has a high degree of independence, and there is no structure in which the observer denitively acts on the congurator as seen in the European example. Members from the national research institutions, Fig. 5 Behavior pattern of American participantsFig. 4 Behavior pattern of European participantsActorCongurator’s placeObserver’s placeSubjectObserver and conguratorActorCongurator’s placeObserverSubjectObserver, congurator, and actor

元のページ  ../index.html#44