[ryukoposting]

Government agencies like to take standards off the shelf whenever they can. Citing something overseen by an apolitical, non-profit organization avoids conflicts of interest (relative to the alternatives).

Random example I found at a glance: NIST recommending use of a specific ISO standard in domains not formally covered by a regulatory body: https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.S...

[o11c]

It's impossible to take ISO seriously after the .docx fiasco.

[noir_lord]

That’s the definition of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Is ISO as an organisation imperfect sometimes (as in the docs case) sure?, it’s composed of humans who are generally flawed creatures, is it generally a good solution despite that?, also sure.

They’ve published tens of thousands off standards over 70 plus years that are deeply important to multiple industries so disregarding them because Microsoft co-opted them once 20 odd years ago seems unreasonable to me.

[hofrogs]

What .docx fiasco?

[lifthrasiir]

Office Open XML, the standard behind .docx and other zipped XML formats, was fast-tracked into the international standard without many rounds of reviews (by the same JTC 1!).

[marcosdumay]

> Citing something overseen by an apolitical, non-profit organization avoids conflicts of interest (relative to the alternatives).

Of course this is a lie. But yes, governments like to claim that.