Talk:Electronic Industries Alliance

Rework required
See website EIA: "The Electionic Industries Alliance (EIA) will cease operations as of December 31, 2010. The former sectors of EIA, Electronic Components Association (ECA), JEDEC, Government Electronics and Information Technology Association (GEIA), now part of TechAmerica, Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA), and Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) continue to serve the constituencies of EIA."--Wosch21149 (talk) 14:04, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Go for it!. Write it and cite it. --Wtshymanski (talk) 15:03, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe I will soon. But I'm more active on the German Wikipedia pages (I completely reworked the EIA article there). I wanted to give a native English speaker a chance first... --Wosch21149 (talk) 16:14, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, done. -- Wosch21149 (talk) 22:07, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks good, thanks for taking the time and effort. --Wtshymanski (talk) 04:59, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

What does "RS" stand for?
How come in many articles "RS" is explained as "recommended standard"? OK, it's easy to memorize, but in the article on RS-232 the history and sources state it differently: "RS-232 was first introduced in 1962 by the Radio Sector of the EIA". So, "RS" seems to originate from the "Radio Sector" and was not just a "recommended standard". Even here (in the section "EIA standards") in this article we state "was originally drafted as a recommended standard, thus the "RS" RS-232" without citing any source. On talk pages of other subjects (e.g. RS-232) it is referred to the explantion given in this article. Should the explanation here be corrected? --Wosch21149 (talk) 21:49, 7 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't have an original RS-232 standard, but I have a ancient copy of RS-464 dated December 1979. This is from before this standard was renamed to ANSI/TIA/EIA-464-B.  Most of this standard is done with a typewriter, but the fifth page (with the cover being page 1, not page five of the standard) is a notice page dated 1981 and looks to be written with some sort of word processor.  On this page it states:


 * Recommended Standards are adopted by EIA without regard to whether or not their adoption may involve patents on articles, materials, or processes. By such action, EIA does not assume liability to any patent owner, nor does it assume any obligation whatever to parties adopting the Recommended Standard.


 * This EIA Recommended Standard is considered to have international standardization implications, but there is no known IEC (or ISO) activity in this product area.


 * I suppose could scan this page and post it on an image board somewhere as some sort of reference or "proof" that EIA considered the RS to mean Recommended Standard. On the other hand, if you don't believe that what I typed above is directly out of RS-464, you probably wouldn't believe a scan was either.


 * That's the problem with all of these RS articles. If you have a copy of the standard then you know what it says.  If you don't then you look for a reference that might not be correct.  Or you could fork over the $150 to buy an obsolete standard just to see that two words are actually in the standard.  EE JRW (talk) 17:30, 28 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I've come to this page rather late, but when I worked with these documents in the early days the RS most definitely stood for "Radio Standard". I'm staggered not to find any such seminal reference in an encyclopaedic work. Of course, I have no proof... 2A02:C7E:F09:B200:6DA0:D82F:3DBE:8EBF (talk) 09:57, 15 August 2021 (UTC) JR


 * Just discovered that https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/RS-232 also mentions "Radio Standard", although the English version of the page does not. 2A02:C7E:F09:B200:6DA0:D82F:3DBE:8EBF (talk) 11:38, 15 August 2021 (UTC) JR