Laws tend to be general. For example a lay might say something like: Communication between two parties needs to be secure.
Now, what is secure, how do you define it? Like tomte said you have the burden of proof. One way is to say you followed a standard because standards are formulated by "experts" and thus your communication is clear.
An alternative is to develop your own secure algorithm - you might have to proof this at some point that it really is secure.
If a law says that all communication needs to be encrypted using technique x, then it will be outdated as soon as this technique is broken. Thus a law specifying that communication should be secure is something that can last much longer
Besides, this information is very technical and not in the slightest consumer oriented! After looking at the first document I certainly don't want to read further. That is why we have standard bodies, law makers and journalists to do this stuff for is. I don't think that a raw dump would help anybody
If a law says that all communication needs to be encrypted using technique x, then it will be outdated as soon as this technique is broken. Thus a law specifying that communication should be secure is something that can last much longer
Besides, this information is very technical and not in the slightest consumer oriented! After looking at the first document I certainly don't want to read further. That is why we have standard bodies, law makers and journalists to do this stuff for is. I don't think that a raw dump would help anybody