zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. dfex+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-08-01 02:56:23
Aeroplanes are complex, but you can bet your life there are standards for those. And cars? Wow - I'm not sure which country you live in, but there are probably as many safety standards for road vehicles as there are for planes!

To continue the analogy from earlier - standards wouldn't mean all web applications would have to be designed, programmed and work exactly the same way, but it would mean that they would need to be formally tested (to an approved test plan), and to use your example, would need to demonstrate that each of those layers of fallbacks (as dictated by the standard and covered in the test plan) operate correctly in order to be certified.

If anything, I think software has a huge advantage over physical world engineering in that testing can be replicated at virtually no cost whenever a change is made to the design. I shudder to think how many cars get trashed in order to meet vehicle safety testing requirements.

replies(1): >>fnord7+c6
2. fnord7+c6[view] [source] 2023-08-01 04:07:45
>>dfex+(OP)
you're confusing regulations with standards
replies(1): >>dfex+7a
◧◩
3. dfex+7a[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-08-01 04:41:59
>>fnord7+c6
No, I'm not.

Here is the Australian Standard for Caravan and light trailer towing components, Part 1: Towbars and towing brackets

https://store.standards.org.au/product/as-4177-1-2004

There are thousands of these documents covering everything to do with transport from the vehicles to the reflectivity of street signs.

The regulation (at least in my state) is that only engineers who are registered as Registered Engineers are permitted to carry out professional engineering services in this state.

[go to top]