IEEE at work on revised Li-ion battery standard

Yeah, we're trying to hold back the snickering too. It seems the IEEE has chosen now as the time to start looking over those (previously innocent) battery protocols, and the timing couldn't be any more convenient. Rather than buckling down and getting a finalized 802.11n standard out the door, the task force is being silently forced to take a good, hard look at battery criteria. Currently focused on IEEE P1825 -- the designation for lithium-ion and lithium-ion polymer batteries used in digital cameras and camcorders -- the crew is hoping to set more uniform regulations for the "design, production, and evaluation" of said cells. The update is supposedly aimed at revising "design analysis, testing and qualification checks" to ensure those QA reports filter out any, um, potentially explosive misfits, and while the project is scheduled to be completed "within 18 months," we know how quickly these folks let their deadlines slip. But the force isn't letting those increasingly-concerned computer manufactures get too much of a head start, as the IEEE 1625 is also slated for a (very necessary) revamp -- which makes perfect sense considering its label: "laptop battery standard."

[strider_mt2k @ Sep 27th 2006 8:47AM]

By the way check out the latest release from The Exploding Misfits coming out soon on myspace.

(They're the ginchiest!)

[Wonderboy @ Sep 27th 2006 9:47AM]

I'd love to see an actual corporation run the way IEEE is run. If their finalization rate determined their successfulness, they'd be long gone by now.

Don't get me wrong, I love standardization, but there has to be a better way to get things done.

[battery person @ Sep 27th 2006 1:35PM]

it's not like anyone at engadget knows anything about batteries...

[Jason Zions @ Sep 27th 2006 6:03PM]

Nick is exactly right - the IEEE is the executive which handles the standardization efforts of tens of thousands of volunteers worldwide. In fact, the 802.xx family of standards is actually managed by the IEEE Computer Society's standards group, which is distinct from (and funded separately from) the mainline IEEE standards group.

As for standards taking so long to finalize - trust me, I've been there. The more important a standard is (i.e. the more money it will cost you to change to conform to it, or the more money it will cost your competitors, or the more impact it has on your other businesses...) the more people get involved. The more people, the more opinions.

The rules of developing standards *require* the committee to consider and *respond to* every objection. 1000 smart engineers working for 450 companies who see high stakes in the 802.11n standard means the ballot resolution committee probably got drowned in thousands of objections and comments. Since the ballot resolution committee is made up of real people from real companies with real day jobs to do, they can steal at best a week here or a week there to do resolution. It takes significant time to properly address concerns.

The IEEE has strict rules about standards. A bad electrical standard can cost real users dollars and time; but a bad standard can also cost people their lives. Damage as a result of excess EMI or RFI is bad. A standard which doesn't nail everything down, which allows two people to make products which conform to what the standard says but still don't work with each other, is a bad standard. Getting it right takes time.

If you don't believe me - get involved. Join a standards committee. Pretty much anyone can.

[Nick @ Sep 27th 2006 11:01PM]

Jason wrote:
"Nick is exactly right "

Hahaha. Except that they deleted my comment. Nothing like censoring the truth, eh?

[Been there Done That... @ Sep 28th 2006 12:10PM]

It's a shame the dropped Nick's comments, but I have to say, Jason pretty much nailed it.

Engadget should chagrined to have allowed an obvious misrepresentation of the situation between the wifi and battery standards groups. Trust me; these are NOT the same folks. The commenter was either incredibly naive, or trying to spread misinformation.

To his point on .11n, yeah, the latest I've heard; comments in the thousands, and at least half of them are 'technical' not 'editorial', so there is still a big chunk of work going on.