> > > I think TeX society should not go under indirect supervision > > > of ISO, W3C, etc. because there will come some time that one considers > > > charging > > oh come! dont be *too* paranoid. if we have to pay a license fee to use > > ISO standards, the world will have become *very* odd... in fact, there do exist iso standards which require you to pay implementation licence fees. there are very strict guidelines, however, about standardising patented techniques: in particular, the owner of the patent is required to declare that they will never refuse an application for licence. > From what I understand with regard to Fortran standards, if you want a > copy of the standard, you have to pay a substantial sum to ISO. if you want a copy of the latex book, you have to pay a sustantial sum to addison wesley longman. less, i admit, than one pays to one's national standards body[*] for a transposed copy of something as big as fortran, but the principle is the same. personally, i would be quite happy to be using something for which a formal specification, to which i could test compliance, existed. but i think i'm a bit unusual in that. perhaps it comes from having seen the standardsation process from the inside... r [*] none but a true idiot _buys_ standards from iso. bsi's charges for standards are extortionate, but as nothing by comparison with iso's.