• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: ISO turns evil?
• From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>
• Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 21:18:17 -0400
• In-reply-to: <1064350468.3973.9.camel@z...>
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE03F9ECB2@h...> <1064350468.3973.9.camel@z...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030901 Thunderbird/0.2

Rick Marshall wrote:

>now imagine we tried to run electrical safety standards this way. you
>have to pay a licence fee to wire to the electrical standard...... or
>build aeroplanes... i think you get the idea
>
>so while i don't think the iso policy will worry me much, on further
>reflection i strongly agree that this is both bad policy and principle
>
>  
>

But in fact, if you want to build an aircraft you have to get it 
certificated (not including home-builts, but you still have to have a 
lot of paperwork for them), and that costs a lot of money.  That is not 
really distinguishable from paying to use standards , in a way.

Cheers,

Tom P

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: ISO turns evil?
    • From: David Megginson <dmeggin@a...>

• References:
  • RE: ISO turns evil?
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
  • RE: ISO turns evil?
    • From: Rick Marshall <rjm@z...>

• Prev by Date: RE: relax ng public list?
• Next by Date: Re: ISO turns evil?
• Previous by thread: RE: ISO turns evil?
• Next by thread: Re: ISO turns evil?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread