[cpdean]

I like SQL and all but I really don't care to follow ISO releases. They're hundreds of dollars and nobody actually implements the whole thing. I get way more excited about database releases.

Does anyone else find value in what's in an ISO standard?

[lolinder]

> They're hundreds of dollars

This isn't SQL-specific, but this is 100% the problem for me. There's such a big culture gap between the way that we do things in most of the tech world and ISO, and one of the biggest clashes is this weird $180 PDF thing.

If I want to implement a new standards-compliant HTML parser, I can hop right onto whatwg.org and view the complete standard instantly [0]. It's massive and complicated, but it's freely accessible to anyone interested.

In contrast, if I want to implement an ISO 8601-compliant date parser, ISO wants me to buy their PDF for CHF166 (~$180 USD). This spec is for a standard that is orders of magnitude less complex, and they're charging through the nose for it.

I'm unclear what makes the difference between a standard that can be maintained by a community for the benefit of everyone and a standard that needs to be locked behind a paywall.

[0] https://html.spec.whatwg.org/

[chillfox]

A pay-walled standard is not available, and an unavailable standard is not a standard at all.

The only real way of fixing it is for enough people to ignore ISO so they become irrelevant.

If you are building a new DB engine (toy or not), don't use SQL. Either design a new spec or use something that's more openly specified (maybe GraphQL or EdgeQL).