“Simon, I’m beginning to think that you were right and I was
wrong. You said a standard’s process is a crucial aspect of the
standard’s product, and a process that is not open cannot be
trusted to produce a product that can be considered open. I
maintained that I had seen and used many wonderful standards that
took absolutely zero input from me, and therefore I didn’t see my
participation as a necessary prerequisite for assuring quality in
the future. I believed that no matter what the process, a standard
should be judged by the product. Watching the fallout settle from
the BRM in Geneva, I’m beginning to think that you were right and I
was wrong.“What you got right is that when a process is allowed to go out
of its way to exclude legitimate participation, we must withdraw
from the presumption that the standard can be legitimate, even if
the end product does not overly exclude the possibility of an open
source implementation…”