Skip to main content
8 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jun 17, 2021 at 0:56 comment added Joe Flack So lame. Making people pay for a standard that is hoped everyone will abide by is so antithetical to its entire purpose. Like shooting itself in the foot.
Mar 27, 2018 at 11:30 comment added Mark Amery Of course ISO claim that the money is being spent on development of standards. They'd say that in a world where it's completely true, and they'd also say that in a world where all the valuable labour is being done by unpaid volunteers who would've made it freely available if ISO hadn't convinced them to hand over the copyrights, and where literally the only thing that ISO does is rent-seeking to enrich themselves. I don't know which of those worlds we live in, or how I'd find out, but the fact that ISO says "we're doing something useful, honest!" doesn't help distinguish the two.
Apr 12, 2017 at 7:31 history edited CommunityBot
replaced http://programmers.stackexchange.com/ with https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/
Nov 25, 2012 at 22:27 comment added Cole Tobin AFAIK, ECMA standards are open (at least some are), but those are free. W3C is free. Unicode is free.
Dec 29, 2011 at 17:15 comment added ibid The people who actually write the standard do not usually receive any of that money. It all goes into maintaining the ISO bureaucracy. ECMA, for example, distributes its standards for free.
Dec 29, 2011 at 12:53 history edited Thomas Owens CC BY-SA 3.0
added 68 characters in body
Dec 29, 2011 at 12:42 vote accept Tamás Szelei
Dec 29, 2011 at 12:35 history answered Thomas Owens CC BY-SA 3.0