Last Friday I received a telephone call from D Tech’s Tim Pond which was quickly followed by a press release from their PR company expressing concerns about the soon to be published ISO data standard ISO 28560-2.

Given the nature of the allegations I contacted two other members of the recently formed RFID Alliance to see if they shared Tim’s concerns. They didn’t – although they did offer the information that they had been approached by a commercial company that has already developed software for the standard.

I have previously published any press releases I have been sent by RFID companies and would not want to deny D Tech a voice so here’s the statement in full – with my comments in italics.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………..

D-Tech expresses concern at proposed charges for new data standard model

RFID supplier D-Tech has publicly expressed their frustration at having received a communication from a source proposing an excessive fee for accrediting software to the new data standard model.

Speaking at the RFID Conference Marvin Crisp, Managing Director, D-Tech said:   “We question any form of levy placed on the new data standard model.  An open ISO, in our view, should be free.  If it’s not free then it’s not open.  If it’s restricted to one company and one supplier then we come up against a lot of issues that can be very counter productive to suppliers and customers.

Comment: An ISO is indeed open but there is a charge for buying the documentation from the ISO. An ISO is in the public domain and cannot be exclusively owned by any one company. I’m afraid I missed Marvin’s speech at the conference or I would have commented at the time.

He added:  “I can’t speak on behalf of all RFID suppliers but I gather the general consensus is that no-one is happy about this.  I feel strongly that it is D-Tech’s duty as a supplier to speak out.   We’ve all fully supported the adoption of the new model, as it quite rightly offers the best opportunities to vendors and libraries to scope RFID to its full potential.   Now we are being asked to support something that goes against best practice and the open access principles we have all been pursuing.”

Comment:  I am somewhat at a loss to know who is requiring D Tech  to “support something that goes against best practice”. I am aware that at least one member of the Alliance has already developed support for ISO28560-2 in its draft form – entirely on their own. I can’t see how they could have done so if these allegations were correct.

D-Tech’s Tim Pond has also been vocal about these recent developments:  “All RFID suppliers will have to develop their own data model structures anyway so that they can convert existing customers’ labels ‘on the fly’.   It doesn’t help to have approaches like this where we will have to bespoke design elements for different data models.  In fact, our new Self Check V4 software has LabelConvert software as standard, allowing the conversion of datamodels through self service, circulation, conversion and the RFID wand on the fly. This will give customers an open and up to date data model.

Comment: I think this is a straightforward piece of marketing and not actually relevant to the rest of the piece and so probably requires no comment from me. I have already expressed my views on migration strategies elsewhere on this blog.

He added: “There has been talk that the final structure ratified list will be available in early January 2010.  We would propose that the document is released to ensure that all models are created and based upon this structure and not a derivative or misinterpreted version. “

Comment: It’s rather more than “talk”. The ISO publishes the timetable for standards publication on its official website. The standard IS the standard and available to anyone who wishes to use it.

D-Tech is asking for the support of BIC and CILIP in ensuring that a mechanism is in place to accredit and have test data model facilities accessible, without costs into the thousands.

It was noted that Bob McKee did state at the end of the RFID conference that a more suitable and less costly mechanism for testing be considered, with costs born by the RFID vendors.

D-Tech asks what shape and form this might take and when where and how this is going to be ready.

Comment: The issue of possible “accreditation” was raised at the conference by both Bob McKee and I. I’m not sure where the demand comes from – or who should carry it out. I know it will be discussed by BIC/CILIP and the RFID committee (which includes D Tech) in January 2010.

Marvin Crisp summed up his feelings:  “We’re facing Government cuts in public spending and the impact this may have on libraries and, in the same breath, talking about committing to tens of thousands of pounds for an accreditation that should be freely available.  It just doesn’t make sound commercial sense for any supplier to be forced into this situation”. 

Comment: I know of no such charge – or requirement for a charge. Perhaps other readers of the blog know more but neither BIC, CILIP or any other member of the RFID Alliance has been able to tell me to what charges D Tech might be referring.

Tim Pond:  “We will have to wait for the detailed document to ensure the new Data Model is structured and modelled for all. Time is looming and shall need to have evidenced based systems in place for this.”

Comment: The “detailed document” I presume is the standard? If so a copy may freely be obtained from a number of outlets including the BSI.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………..

I confess I am as baffled as I am concerned by this statement. It seemed that everyone was behind the standard but this suggests that this is far from the case. Let’s hope that this is just a misunderstanding.

• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post