.



Full article: http://www.ewg.etsi.org/i...ureWM.html




Here are my problems with EWM:

1) First the standard of working methods is not one controlling group but 8
2) The 8 controlling groups change and evolve their methodologies either slowly or too quickly
3) They are building methods around web tools. Any CMM or Six Sigma group will tell you that you build your methods first. THEN you work tools around them. A reliance on tools spells certain doom.

How are they expecting to standardize electronic working methods around the world when they can standardize their own internal methods?


.
[Edited 6/10/05 17:40pm]

i have a feeling this thread will be a smashing success.

Anxiety said:

I should stick to balls, huh?

AsianBoi777 said:

Stop that sexy talk!

AsianBoi777 said:

no, not at all. this is fascinating. but if you explained how this thread RELATES to balls, it would be helpful. JUST SAYIN'.

littlemissg said:

This is like watching one of your childhood cartoon character heroes die.

Fauxie said:

yeah, if your hero was strawberry shortcake.

Anxiety said:

JAYSUS CHRIST!

Ok,
Imagine you're trying to shave your balls. But your balls are sensative to petroleum products. You have to have ones that process out .05 IU's of carbon in the petrol. Otherwise you break out in a rash.

But all the petroleum manufactures measure different and are in different countries. They also place instructions and content labels in their own language.

So instead, of standardizing the measurements of the vaseline and the language used on the labels, you seek to find webbased programs that translate for you. The problem is that you become to slave to the programs and at the mercy of their translations.

You end up with hairy balls for weeks. And when you finally shave them, their no gauranteeing that that creme you use won't be filled with IUs of stinging carbon.

YOUR BALLS WOULD BE ON FIRE!!!

Anxiety said:

Exactly!

AsianBoi777 said:

orgnote me.