3 ms·
I'm pretty sure that a fair number of commonly used QR libraries were not developed by people who shelled out for a copy of ISO 18004 (they probably just looked
by cyphar 6y ago
I'm pretty sure that a fair number of commonly used QR libraries were not developed by people who shelled out for a copy of ISO 18004 (they probably just looked at descriptions of how it works outside of the standard document). Similarly, you can implement your own SQL dialect without needing to read the ISO standard for it.
Yes if you want to be certified and want to get a copy of the standards document you'll need to pay, but it's not necessary (and I doubt that Oracle did, given that they implemented SQL before the standard existed and probably were involved in drafting it).
- pjmlp 6y agoSure that is how 1€ product shops work, which doesn't mean the final product actually does what it supposed to do. Then that screwdriver turns itself instead of turning the screw. > probably were involved in drafting it Which also isn't done for free beer, ISO processes have associated costs.
- cyphar 6y agoI'm not disagreeing with the validity of ISO or anything like that, I don't know where you got that impression. The original point being made in this thread was that Oracle copied the API of SQL from IBM and thus is guilty of the same thing that they are accusing Google of doing. The counter-point was that SQL is an ISO standard and Oracle (allegedly) licensed it, which was then followed up by my point about Oracle DB predating the ISO standard. Hence why ISO is being discussed and why I was making the point that buying a standard document from ISO or paying for certification are not really relevant to this discussion.