from the two different approaches should be common, or at least corroborative.
With all standards, it is important to recognize that they have to be realistic in scope, and they are not intended to act as some legislative harness constraining innovative design. The standards themselves are not mandatory; compliance only becomes a formal requirement if the particular nation-state puts legislation in place to make it so. Serving on standards committees is a largely voluntary activity, and active participation comes from individuals with genuine interests in the particular fields, but they also have to represent their parent national and commercial interests. Such interests tend to be conservative, with a reluctance to become too specific, or be seen in any way to be restrictive. As such there is the danger that standards, though well intentioned, can become so general that they have little impact on the design community.
There are several long-term requirements of TICS MMI standards. They must aid the design of TICS and make the difficult compromise between being specific enough to give clear guidance, and general enough to be widely applicable; and they must be able to encompass differing end user populations with their differing cultural attributes (e.g., in relation to control stereotypes) and performance abilities (e.g., perceptual abilities of young and elderly). They must also guide system developers through the maze of difficulties inherent in the attempts to introduce new technologies, without imposing demands that will slow the progress down, nor constrain free competition of technological excellence in the marketplace. Standards need to be put in place to help designers resolve problems associated with the allocation of function between the driver and the vehicle, and also for the integration of systems with each other around the central primary driving task. Finally, standards need to show how valid evaluations of design options can be performed.
If performance standards for in-vehicle MMI can be developed, they will encourage and facilitate good design. However, we are still some way away from fully documented and validated performance standards. In the meantime, product and process standards will continue to evolve, and they certainly have the potential to minimize the occurrences of poor design of displays and controls; but, in the near future, there is little they can contribute to the design of complex interactive systems for use in the dynamic traffic environment.
Although the ultimate goal of fully validated and comprehensive performance-based standards may still be several years from being achieved