Interoperability is a property of a product or system, whose interfaces are completely understood, to work with other products or systems, present or future, without any restricted access or implementation.
While the term was initially defined for information technology or systems engineering services to allow for information exchange, a more broad definition takes into account social, political, and organizational factors that impact system to system performance. Task of building coherent services for users when the individual components are technically different and managed by different organizations
under open standards
This document is subsequently released to the public, and henceforth becomes an open standard. It is usually published and is available freely or at a nominal cost to any and all comers, with no further encumbrances. Various vendors and individuals (even those who were not part of the original group) can use the standards document to make products that implement the common protocol defined in the standard, and are thus interoperable by design, with no specific liability or advantage for any customer for choosing one product over another on the basis of standardised features.
[note: hard to find anything anywhere that isn’t embedded in a mindset/framework that assumes money/business/consumerism.. so no wonder..]
Many organizations are dedicated to interoperability. All have in common that they want to push the development of the World Wide Web towards the semantic web.
www ness – imagining something like blockchain (only because vinay is saying it’s the means to get databases and networks to dance) used as a facilitator/scraper of data (from self-talk as data) to pool on some wikipedia/wordpress (zoom-in)/www (zoom out) type platform
semantic: relating to meaning, language, logic.
under software interoperability
under 1\ product testing – ….Interoperable product testing is different from conformance-based product testing as conformance to a standard does not necessarily engender interoperability with another product which is also tested for conformance.
under 5\ standard implementation – .. Software interoperability requires a common agreement that is normally arrived at via an industrial, national or international standard
under power and market dominance
Interoperability tends to be regarded as an issue for experts and its implications for daily living are sometimes underrated. The European Union Microsoft competition case shows how interoperability concerns important questions of power relationships. In 2004, the European Commission found that Microsoft had abused its market power by deliberately restricting interoperability between Windows work group servers and non-Microsoft work group servers. By doing so, Microsoft was able to protect its dominant market position for work group server operating systems, the heart of corporate IT networks. Microsoft was ordered to disclose complete and accurate interface documentation, which will enable rival vendors to compete on an equal footing (“the interoperability remedy”). As of June 2005 the Commission is market testing a new proposal by Microsoft to do this, having rejected previous proposals as insufficient.
i hear jack ma talking about china not competing with u.s. et al.. but also blocking others.. so that china doesn’t have global options…
perhaps that’s a need when we aren’t zooming out enough in the zoom dance. (not to mention.. keeping focus on money/business/consumerism) ie: we need all of us. nonrivalrous is good. blocking out not so much. patent/proprietary.. is keeping us from us. perhaps because we don’t trust us.. perhaps because we’ve never really seen us..
we can. we can’t not.