Inconsistencies in ISO between Fuji and Olympus?

Truman Prevatt wrote:

myotisone wrote:

John Gellings wrote:

myotisone wrote:

lewiedude2 wrote:

Bill Ferris wrote:

Truman Prevatt wrote:

ISO actually is an acronym for International Organization of Standards

Actually, ISO is from the Greek term, isos, meaning equal.

Truman is correct here, as usual.

Not that it maters that much, but:

"Because 'International Organization for Standardization' would have different acronyms in different languages (IOS in English, OIN in French for Organisation internationale de normalisation), our founders decided to give it the short form ISO. ISO is derived from the Greek 'isos', meaning equal. Whatever the country, whatever the language, we are always ISO."

https://www.iso.org/about-us.html

To me, that means they are both correct.

I can't see how.

An acronym is:

"an abbreviation formed from the initial letters of other words and pronounced as a word"

That's one definition. Another is an initialism. Look that one up. It is often the first letter of each word. More often than no unimportant words are omitted, like "of" or "the" or "with." For example ADA is an acronym for Americans with Disabilities Act. But it need not be the first letter of the "main words." For example ESP is the common acronym for ExtraSensory Perception) and TNT is the acronym for TriNitroToluene.

FWIW, many sources do NOT consider an initialism as a type of acronym, but instead consider them distinct types of abbreviation. Take ESP. If you pronounce it as the word "esp," they would classify it as an acronym, but if you pronounce it as the letters "E S P," it is an initialism. NASA is an acronym while OVF is an initialism.

This description from Wikipedia details the controversy:

"Most of the dictionary entries and style guide recommendations regarding the term acronym through the twentieth century did not explicitly acknowledge or support the expansive sense. The Merriam–Webster's Dictionary of English Usage from 1994 is one of the earliest publications to advocate for the expansive sense,[19] and all the major dictionary editions that include a sense of acronym equating it with initialism were first published in the twenty-first century. The trend among dictionary editors appears to be towards including a sense defining acronym as initialism: The Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary added such a sense in its eleventh edition in 2003,[20][21] and both the Oxford English Dictionary[22][1] and the American Heritage Dictionary[23][10] added such senses in their 2011 editions. The 1989 edition of the Oxford English Dictionary only included the exclusive sense for acronym and its earliest citation was from 1943.[22] In early December 2010, Duke University researcher Stephen Goranson published a citation for acronym to the American Dialect Society e-mail discussion list which refers to PGN being pronounced "pee-gee-enn," antedating English language usage of the word to 1940.[24] Linguist Ben Zimmer then mentioned this citation in his December 16, 2010 "On Language" column about acronyms in The New York Times Magazine.[25] By 2011, the publication of the third edition of the Oxford English Dictionary added the expansive sense to its entry for acronym and included the 1940 citation.[1] As the Oxford English Dictionary structures the senses in order of chronological development,[26] it now gives the "initialism" sense first.

English language usage and style guides which have entries for acronym generally criticize the usage that refers to forms that are not pronounceable words. Fowler's Dictionary of Modern English Usage says that acronym "denotes abbreviations formed from initial letters of other words and pronounced as a single word, such as NATO (as distinct from B-B-C)" but adds later "In everyday use, acronym is often applied to abbreviations that are technically initialisms, since they are pronounced as separate letters."[27] The Chicago Manual of Style acknowledges the complexity ("Furthermore, an acronym and initialism are occasionally combined (JPEG), and the line between initialism and acronym is not always clear") but still defines the terms as mutually exclusive.[28] Other guides outright deny any legitimacy to the usage: Bryson's Dictionary of Troublesome Words says "Abbreviations that are not pronounced as words (IBM, ABC, NFL) are not acronyms; they are just abbreviations."[29] Garner's Modern American Usage says "An acronym is made from the first letters or parts of a compound term. It's read or spoken as a single word, not letter by letter."[30] The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage says "Unless pronounced as a word, an abbreviation is not an acronym."[31]"

I prefer the restricted definition of acronym.

LOL