[lsb-discuss] What else would we ask of the ISO process; was: Next steps for ISO and the LSB.

keld at keldix.com keld at keldix.com
Wed Jul 25 21:00:15 UTC 2012

On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 03:28:12PM -0400, R P Herrold wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Jul 2012, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> >(a) Document the minimal process that the LSB
> >   needs to follow in order to continue publishing
> >   a Publically Available Specification (PAS) with
> >   the ISO.
> >What else might we do?
> Some questions ...

> 2. There is much talk about the value of having an ISO seal of 
> approval, but in all honesty, in the last six years, we have 
> never had contact from anyone citing that as the reason for 
> contact.  The benefit to be received, in exchange for this 
> work (which would be done rather than working on previously 
> chosen LSB goals and priorities) is unclear, and I'd 
> appreciate more than 'arm waving' about that the value of an 
> ISO seal of approval is, in a form sufficient to permit an 
> objective measurement in a year or so, of the expected, vs the 
> realized benefits from pursuing such a process.  How shall we 
> measure the benefits to be obtained?

I am also representing a Linux group (klid.dk) that strives
to make ISO standards for Linux. That is one of the issues that drives
my engagement here. We believe in KLID that open standards including
ISO standards will help us promote Linux in the Danish marketplace.

> 3. The ISO adopted OpenOffice v commercial .doc/.docx file 
> format benefit that was asserted in the call, is not clear in 
> the US market.  If a file format for, say, a resume, is 
> sought, it will be requested in .doc, .pdf, or flat text.  If 
> a contract is being circulated for 'red-line' markup between 
> lawyers or corporations, it will be in wordperfect, or .doc 
> format, if the markup history is to be useably preserved, in 
> my experience.  Is there any objective metric as to what file 
> formats are being circulated between parties not all under a 
> single IT regime's control that show a reason to think that 
> the ISO form has measurable benefit elsewhere?

Indeed there has been a measurable benefit for Open Document Format in
a number of countries - and great discussions on mandating ODF
and what other standards. This includes most of Europe
and South America. Even Massachusetts were at one time mandating ODF.
But it is very hard to break the Microsoft monopoly.
Now Google has done some eforts to provide a ODF service in the cloud, with
some success. ODF has actually gained quite some market share - I think over 
10 % overall. Wikipedia has some info:

> 4. It is silly to think that an ISO imprimatur will cause 
> desktop adoption of Linux to the exclusion of commercial 
> efforts.  The server room's adoption of Linux clearly was not 
> driven by the LSB's efforts, nor that of ISO.  The 'action' is 
> in small devices -- smart phones, tablets, and prevasive 
> embedded devices serving limited functions -- and the LSB is 
> no-where near ready to document for submission standards to 
> ISO in that space.  How is ISO in this space, and should LSB 
> be there? [this is the tail end of the unofficial minutes 
> observations]

I think LSB has potential in the small devices world.
But it will probably take some years to get there.
I am used to work for long time spans.
I started with UNIX some 30 years ago, with Linux about 20 years ago,
and then also the internet some 30 years ago, and I think all 3
items has come some way since then. This was not at all certain
when I started engagement in these issues.

best regards

More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list