引文:

或許因為 RCI@Taiwan 一直強調"2167A/498/016是標準的SOW"，所以小弟引申為 "(所有)軍規是標準的SOW"，如果， RCI@Taiwan 沒有那樣的意思，我對於我的擴大引申道歉。

但若"2167A/498/016是標準的SOW"，由於1995年ISO/IEC 12207:1995(E)發布，美軍將MIL-STD-498 "脫下軍服"給了EIA/IEEE透過P1498轉成EIA/IEEE J-STD-016。並於1998年5月27日以MIL-STD-498 Notice 1發布取消，並以IEEE/EIA 12207代替。以下是內容：
MIL-STD-498, dated 5 December 1994, is hereby canceled. Information regarding software development and documentation is now contained in the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)/Electronics Industries Association (EIA) standard, IEEE/EIA 12207, “Information technology-Software life cycle processes”. IEEE/EIA 12207 is packaged in three parts. The three parts are: IEEE/EIA 12207.0, “Standard for Information Technology-Software life cycle processes”; IEEE/EIA 12207.1, “Guide for ISO/IEC 12207, Standard for Information Technology-Software life cycle processes-Life cycle data”; and IEEE/EIA 12207.2, “Guide for ISO/IEC 12207, Standard for Information Technology-Software life cycle processes-Implementation considerations.”

不知，由此看來，498被取消之後(2167A被498取代，DOD-STD-2167A Notice 1, 1994年12月5日)，是否IEEE/EIA 12207也是"標準SOW"？IEEE/EIA 12207的前言為中，有關其運用：
IEEE/EIA 12207.0 may be used to
a. Acquire, supply, develop, operate, and maintain software.
b. Support the above functions in the form of quality assurance, configuration management, joint reviews, audits, verification, validation, problem resolution, and documentation.
c. Manage and improve the organization's processes and personnel.
d. Establish software management and engineering environments based upon the life cycle processes as adapted and tailored to serve business needs.
e. Foster improved understanding between customers and vendors and among the parties involved in the life cycle of a software product.
f. Facilitate world trade in software.

IEEE/EIA 12207.0-1996 (其實就是ISO/IEC 12207:1995(E))第1.5節Limitations中提到：
　This International Standard describes the architecture of the software life cycle processes but does not specify the details of how to implement or perform the activities and tasks included in the processes.
　This International Standard is not intended to prescribe the name, format, or explicit content of the documentation to be produced. This International Standard may require development of documents of similar class or type; various plans are an example. This International Standard, however, does not imply that such documents be developed or packaged separately or combined in some fashion. These decisions are left to the user of this International Standard.
　This International Standard does not prescribe a specific life cycle model or software development method. The parties of this International Standard are responsible for selecting a life cycle model for the software project and mapping the processes, activities, and tasks in this International Standard onto that model. The parties are also responsible for selecting and applying the software development methods and for performing the activities and tasks suitable for the software project.
　This International Standard is not intended to be in conflict with any organization’s policies, standards or procedures that are already in place. However, any conflict needs to be resolved and any overriding conditions and situations need to be cited in writing as exceptions to the application of this International Standard.

有關所指MIL-HDBK-287中下列說法：
引文:
在MIL-HDBK-287小弟並未看到相關的說法，所指287各小節為：
1. MIL-HDBK-287無4.1.2小節
2. 4.2.9標題為：Flexibility of DOD-STD-2167A
看了各節內容也沒有。(在DOD-STD-2167A中也找不到)

引文:
並非裁適的作法有問題，而是2167A的裁適方式，目前新的標準中，有裁適的原則與裁適的流程(12207置於附錄A/B)，但沒有一完整的裁適指引(逐步裁適的說明，在ISO/IEC TR 15271也見不到)。而國家標準有CNS 14837(ISO/IEC 12207)及CNS 14974 (ISO/IEC TR 15271)也一樣有相同的問題，再者有ISO/IEC 15289為文件內容標準，CNS無相對標準。所以聲稱為標準SOW時，在不明的情況下(不能拿您我對於標準的理解來看所有的政府部門專案承辦人)，對於政府部門最簡單的做法就是，全部列入(我通通都要，因為是標準的SOW)，其思維可以凌駕於標準裁適過程與原則之上。最後的做法就是把廠商"整死"，這就是我所謂的"危險"。而沒有WBS的指導，這件事就更加危險(廠商責任就會在莫名其妙中，變成包山包海)，因為WBS是系統工程的結果，可以做為寫SOW或訂合約需求的方向、與範圍。直接宣稱那些標準是"標準SOW"是危險的，且也沒有個標準(2167A/498/016/12207)有直接標示：本文件敘述的內容為工程計畫/專案之SOW標準；還是不要擴大引申為宜。雖然人可以創造環境，但是環境沒有形成前，保守比較好。

引文:
這是我所不明白的，為何RCI@Taiwan 會認為我支持"不經篩選地全套搬到我國政府運用來擬SOW"。再者，恕小弟粗暴地認為RCI@Taiwan 並沒有細讀及深入理解MIL-HDBK-881與MIL-HDBK-245D。我在協會的論壇裡只談軟體生命週期裡可以用的部分(其中包含系統工程)，畢竟協會是軟體品質協會。MIL-HDBK-881A只是取了完整的發展概念與方法，給出的也是其中與軟體系統有關者(其中還有武器系統、艦船、火砲、飛彈等等的WBS，這些我都沒有談)，而MIL-HDBK-245D也只談了格式與發展的注意事項與用詞/用語，以及可以用的部分。這些其實也就是篩選/裁適的結果了。

----------------
引文: