I always find it amusing when dealing with users around the world that ANSI is recognized worldwide, and has only one commonly used expanded form (American National Standards Institute). While there are a few companies that have kludged names to allow them to usurp the ANSI acronym, they are oddball efforts which don't seem to confuse newcomers to the technology field.
ISO on the other hand is recognized much less frequently, with much less certainty, and looking up the full name from the ISO acronym can be very confusing, especially for Asians.
I can always explain what I mean by the term ISO, and have grown accustomed to simply providing the URL with my first reference in order to avoid confusion. I've never, ever needed to explain what I meant when I used the ANSI acronym.
I think that we ought to call it "Joe's SQL", in reference to Mr. Celko and his efforts to entice, cajole, or bludgeon everyone onto a single playing field!
On a slightly more serious note, I like "Standard SQL" as a description, but I'm pretty sure that there is already a United States copyright fight on the phrase. I think that Oracle has first claim on the copyright, but that claim was disputed by Microsoft, IBM, and possibly other companies too. I haven't paid much attention to this, but I remember that the phrase was disputed so that it fell out of general use even by the marketing types.
I don't really care what we call the forum, but I like the idea of a standards based forum for discussing SQL that is both aware of how the different engines implement SQL, but remains as agnostic as is practical in regard to those implementations.
-PatP