I am curious to know more about when the “Today Denmark decided in parliament that they will use only one standard for documents – ODF” happened and where is a source on the details of that action. I’m having trouble parsing the scope of who that will be who are to use only document in one standard format and what ODF specification they have specified.

Is this really standardization by legislation? Or is it adoption for the parliaments own purposes? The only reports I had seen back in January were not about the exclusive adoption of a single document format. Is there something new?

“I believe that success for the entire industry comes from an increased level of direct involvement in the evolution of the systems”; fully agree, that is why de jure standard setting is irrelevant, if consortia (or private parties) deliver better results. Of course for performance based accreditation you then need to follow an approach similar to CAMSS. Here we disagree, it is much better to regulate results than methodology/process. The Commission DG Enterprise moved slightly into the direction of performance based accreditation of consortial standards. Simple pragmatism. Same for EU-funding: Public Prizes for pre-defined industrial achievements are better than project funding where most of the time is wasted on formalities, reporting and other administrative control mechanisms and professionals are forced to operate in an inefficient allocation of their precious time. The http://www.xprize.org/ foundation sets an impressive example.

Andy – long time no speak, I hope you’re well. It isn’t too long ago when our friends at another multi-national IT company were advocating for a wholesale abandonment of ISO, although I will agree that I’ve not heard much from them on that topic of late. Even moves to rank and rate various aspects of SSOs has the potential to decrease the field, and really depends upon who is involved in the process to define the ranking and rating systems.

More generally – I’ll always come back to the point that I believe that success for the entire industry comes from an increased level of direct involvement in the evolution of the systems that we have by anybody who holds a view. Andre mentioned IS29500, and during that process we saw a massive uptick in the number of professionals interested in standardization, unfortunately many of them are just not at the table anymore – and I would argue that we need them back!

Your comments assume the existence of an agenda, but don’t articulate exactly what that is, or who is advocating for it. The reforms that I’ve heard most about (and personally advocated) have involved, not a decrease in diversity, but (a) an increase in process quality and consistency within existing organizations, and (b) articulation of standards that existing and new SSOs could, if they so choose, aspire to (e.g., transparency, access, etc.).

Your comment seems to be predicated on the assumption that there is a move to decrease the field, and I’m not familiar with that agenda, or who is articulating it. Can you block that in for clarity?

Thanks

Andy