4 ms·

There is a side note that really shocked me: > Normally one would need to pay ISO to get a standards document. What is the point of a standard that is not pul

There is a side note that really shocked me: > Normally one would need to pay ISO to get a standards document. What is the point of a standard that is not pulicly available ?

andai 2y ago
A lot of regulations exist largely to make it more difficult for individuals and small companies to compete. I don't know if that's the explanation here (maybe there's good reasons for it?) but it's the first thing that came to mind.
- 082349872349872 2y ago
  According to https://www.iso.org/standard/51502.html https://www.iso.org/standard/51502.html the standard would cost ~$250, so basically 1 hour of dev time. I can't think of anything competitive I might do as an individual/SME in this space that would come in at under 2 weeks, so compared to actually doing the work, paying for the standard would be in the noise. Keep in mind that ISO traditionally dealt more with industrial standards; eg something like https://www.iso.org/standard/40447.html https://www.iso.org/standard/40447.html costs ~$180, but I doubt anyone who'd be attempting to compete in the "Apparatus for industrial gamma radiography" world would consider that expense as any more burdensome than buying office consumables.
  - andai 2y ago
    One hour of dev time? Are you paid half a million a year?
    - 082349872349872 2y ago
      I have been in the past; currently I consult part time, so that's both (a) fully burdened, and (b) not the rate I'd choose if I still wanted 1'800 hours/year. Chop it down by a factor of 2-4, and the question still remains: is $250 significant compared to the amount of work you're going to have to do to be competitive in the PDF-document processing space? (for quick hacks, reverse engineering is good enough. you only need the standard once you're processing enough client documents that you need to know all about the long tail of possible but unlikely constructs your code may encounter, after all)
      - andai 2y ago
        The answer is yes. It's a lot of money for what it is. ISO is the international standards organization. A software developer in Indonesia earns $500 per month. Half your salary for one document is indeed a lot.
        082349872349872 2y ago
        Wow. True; it probably doesn't help that ISO HQ is in Geneva. How much is 500g emping for you all? From a swiss source it's $25. That might give us a rough idea of price differentials... [This is all moot though, because the PDF standard is available gratis.]
        gradschoolfail 2y ago
        ISO docs seem to me to be one of those club antigoods.. paying for them doesnt necessarily make them less destructive (dependent on timescales tho, i do believe that standards are an unalloyed good if they are patched with a timeconstant low compared to what standards bodies consider optimal)
      - andai 2y ago
        Also, could I ask for advice to increase my hourly rate? Mine is closer to $25. Granted I am in Europe, so the ceiling here will be quite different, but I'd love to hear how you did that! I hear (even for those based in US) that location plays a huge part, but even so, I assume specialization also played a big part?
        082349872349872 2y ago
        Yes, specialisation over decades. Perhaps almost as important: I started in the US, and still work almost exclusively for US clients. In a world where I can work almost as easily 12 time zones away as 2, I'm not sure why these huge continental disparities still exist, but they do.
  - poulpy123 2y ago
    it's true that the price is not relevant for most companies, but it makes it unavailable for most individuals interested in the topic
RadiozRadioz 2y ago
https://www.iso.org/footer-links/frequently-asked-questions-faqs/general-faqs.html https://www.iso.org/footer-links/frequently-asked-questions-... "Developing, publishing and maintaining ISO standards incurs a cost, and revenues from selling them helps ISO and its members to cover an important part of these costs. Charging for standards allows us to ensure that they are developed in an impartial environment and therefore meet the needs of all stakeholders for which the standard is relevant. This is essential if standards are to remain effective in the real world."
- tonyedgecombe 2y ago
  >Charging for standards allows us to ensure that they are developed in an impartial environment I don't think the PDF standard was developed in an impartial environment.
  - dotancohen 2y ago
    PDF? I'd agree about that "open" document format that MS Word use (the standard literally states that some things should be implemented "like MS Office does") but not PDF.
  - aredox 2y ago
    Here are the members of the ISO Technical Committee 171 (ISO/TC 171), Document management application, Subcommittee SC 2 who is in charge of developing and updating PDF standards: https://www.iso.org/committee/53674.html?view=participation https://www.iso.org/committee/53674.html?view=participation
- kjksf 2y ago
  You should be able to see when someone is gaslighting you. They charge because they want and can. The above justification might apply to some of their standards but certainly not to PDF. PDF was developed by Adobe. They make lots money selling PDF tools and licensing PDF software. PDF didn't have to be a standard. It could be a proprietary format. Adobe wanted the adoption of PDF so they made PDF a standards so that they can sell more PDF tools. It didn't have to an ISO standard. Adobe could have released it as an open spec with some sort of permissive license. Adobe wanted it to be ISO standard to piggy back on "respectability" of International Standards Organization, to buy the impression that it's an open standard. But ISO makes money by selling standards so we ended up in this situation when the spec for "open" standard that Adobe wants to be adapted costs $100+ to buy. I guess Adobe at some point figured out this is stupid and made the spec available for free.

There is a side note that really shocked me: > Normally one would need to pay ISO to get a standards document. What is the point of a standard that is not pulicly available ?

andai 2y ago

A lot of regulations exist largely to make it more difficult for individuals and small companies to compete. I don't know if that's the explanation here (maybe there's good reasons for it?) but it's the first thing that came to mind.

082349872349872 2y ago
According to https://www.iso.org/standard/51502.html https://www.iso.org/standard/51502.html the standard would cost ~$250, so basically 1 hour of dev time. I can't think of anything competitive I might do as an individual/SME in this space that would come in at under 2 weeks, so compared to actually doing the work, paying for the standard would be in the noise. Keep in mind that ISO traditionally dealt more with industrial standards; eg something like https://www.iso.org/standard/40447.html https://www.iso.org/standard/40447.html costs ~$180, but I doubt anyone who'd be attempting to compete in the "Apparatus for industrial gamma radiography" world would consider that expense as any more burdensome than buying office consumables.
- andai 2y ago
  One hour of dev time? Are you paid half a million a year?
  - 082349872349872 2y ago
    I have been in the past; currently I consult part time, so that's both (a) fully burdened, and (b) not the rate I'd choose if I still wanted 1'800 hours/year. Chop it down by a factor of 2-4, and the question still remains: is $250 significant compared to the amount of work you're going to have to do to be competitive in the PDF-document processing space? (for quick hacks, reverse engineering is good enough. you only need the standard once you're processing enough client documents that you need to know all about the long tail of possible but unlikely constructs your code may encounter, after all)
    - andai 2y ago
      The answer is yes. It's a lot of money for what it is. ISO is the international standards organization. A software developer in Indonesia earns $500 per month. Half your salary for one document is indeed a lot.
      - 082349872349872 2y ago
        Wow. True; it probably doesn't help that ISO HQ is in Geneva. How much is 500g emping for you all? From a swiss source it's $25. That might give us a rough idea of price differentials... [This is all moot though, because the PDF standard is available gratis.]
        gradschoolfail 2y ago
        ISO docs seem to me to be one of those club antigoods.. paying for them doesnt necessarily make them less destructive (dependent on timescales tho, i do believe that standards are an unalloyed good if they are patched with a timeconstant low compared to what standards bodies consider optimal)
    - andai 2y ago
      Also, could I ask for advice to increase my hourly rate? Mine is closer to $25. Granted I am in Europe, so the ceiling here will be quite different, but I'd love to hear how you did that! I hear (even for those based in US) that location plays a huge part, but even so, I assume specialization also played a big part?
      - 082349872349872 2y ago
        Yes, specialisation over decades. Perhaps almost as important: I started in the US, and still work almost exclusively for US clients. In a world where I can work almost as easily 12 time zones away as 2, I'm not sure why these huge continental disparities still exist, but they do.
- poulpy123 2y ago
  it's true that the price is not relevant for most companies, but it makes it unavailable for most individuals interested in the topic

RadiozRadioz 2y ago

https://www.iso.org/footer-links/frequently-asked-questions-faqs/general-faqs.html https://www.iso.org/footer-links/frequently-asked-questions-... "Developing, publishing and maintaining ISO standards incurs a cost, and revenues from selling them helps ISO and its members to cover an important part of these costs. Charging for standards allows us to ensure that they are developed in an impartial environment and therefore meet the needs of all stakeholders for which the standard is relevant. This is essential if standards are to remain effective in the real world."

tonyedgecombe 2y ago
>Charging for standards allows us to ensure that they are developed in an impartial environment I don't think the PDF standard was developed in an impartial environment.
- dotancohen 2y ago
  PDF? I'd agree about that "open" document format that MS Word use (the standard literally states that some things should be implemented "like MS Office does") but not PDF.
- aredox 2y ago
  Here are the members of the ISO Technical Committee 171 (ISO/TC 171), Document management application, Subcommittee SC 2 who is in charge of developing and updating PDF standards: https://www.iso.org/committee/53674.html?view=participation https://www.iso.org/committee/53674.html?view=participation
kjksf 2y ago
You should be able to see when someone is gaslighting you. They charge because they want and can. The above justification might apply to some of their standards but certainly not to PDF. PDF was developed by Adobe. They make lots money selling PDF tools and licensing PDF software. PDF didn't have to be a standard. It could be a proprietary format. Adobe wanted the adoption of PDF so they made PDF a standards so that they can sell more PDF tools. It didn't have to an ISO standard. Adobe could have released it as an open spec with some sort of permissive license. Adobe wanted it to be ISO standard to piggy back on "respectability" of International Standards Organization, to buy the impression that it's an open standard. But ISO makes money by selling standards so we ended up in this situation when the spec for "open" standard that Adobe wants to be adapted costs $100+ to buy. I guess Adobe at some point figured out this is stupid and made the spec available for free.