Let's focus for a moment on the consumers, rather than the producers, of "standards". A standard has value to them to the extent that it helps them create lasting value. That implies it must be complete, available, at a reasonable cost, and last for a reasonable length of time. If a "standard" is secret, or costly to find out, it's much less valuable to standards consumers. If it has great holes that cost those consumers a lot to fill in, or where they make (different) guesses, it loses value. Every time the "standard" changes, the "standards consumers" must do a lot of expensive work to upgrade their products. A "standard" defined, and modified, by your competitor based on *his* economic interest, is likely to be much less desirable than one modified only by consensus of its consumers.