[dsdl-discuss] Re: Contradiction of ISO standards

Overlapping functionality may or may not amount to a "contradiction" - in my
opinion the JTC 1 Directives are unclear on this point.

If a draft contains masses of references to non-normative, confidential or
even non-existent specifications, that similarly may or may not amount to a
contradiction - I don't happen to believe that this was JTC 1's intention,
since these should in principle be resolvable, and the process will in any
case fail if they cannot be resolved.

What is clear, however, is that there is no reason why two ISO standards
cannot have strongly overlapping scope and functionality. Take Fortran and
Pascal as an example of this. No-one has ever proposed that these be
harmonised as a single language, and nor would anyone doubt the value of
both languages being (ultimately) governed by a publicly-accountable
standardisation process.

The question remains: is the intention of JTC 1 to deter the development of
overlapping standards or simply to prevent an overlapping standard from
being processed on the fast track? It will be interesting to see how JTC 1
and ITTF resolve the matter in the case of OOXML.

Francis Cave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dsdl-discuss-bounce@dsdl.org
> [mailto:dsdl-discuss-bounce@dsdl.org]On Behalf Of Rick Jelliffe
> Sent: 03 February 2007 02:55
> To: dsdl-discuss@dsdl.org
> Subject: [dsdl-discuss] Contradiction of ISO standards
>
>
> Obviously I have been doing some research in this area, in relation to
> OOXML. I hope people won't mind me raising this here, because there is a
> DSDL angle to it.
>
> (Disclosure: MS are paying me to work on a Wikipedia entry for four
> days. This email is not billed to them or part of that.)
>
> I have been making the general argument in my blog and in private
> correspondence with Patrick Durusau that because ISO has not seen any
> contradiction in having RELAX NG, even though it competes with W3C XSD,
> then mere overlap of functionality is not enough for contradiction.
>
> However, there is a more fundamental aspect that I (and other writers)
> have missed: the JTC1 requirement against contradiction is limited to
> contradiction with other ISO/IEC standards only. A recommendation from
> W3C, Ecma or OASIS is irrelevant. Anyone see something I cannot see?
>
> According to JTC-1 Directives,
> <http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink.exe/fetch/2000/2489/186491
> /186605/Jtc1_Directives.pdf?nodeid=3959538&vernum=0>
> Edition 5, Version 2.0, section 13.4:
>
> During the 30-day review period, an NB [national standardizing body]
> may identify to the JTC 1 Secretariat any perceived contradiction
> with other JTC 1, ISO or IEC standards. If such a contradiction is
> alleged, the matter shall be resolved by the ITTF and JTC 1
> Secretariat in accordance with Section 13.2 before ballot voting can
> commence. If no contradiction is alleged, the fast-track ballot
> voting commences immediately following the 30-day period.
>
> In the Fifteenth Meeting of JTC1, held in 2000, the following
> Resolution 27, "Consistency of JTC 1 Products" was adopted:
>
> JTC 1 stresses the strong need for _consistency_ of its products
> (ISs and TRs) irrespective of the route through which they were
> developed. Any inconsistency will _confuse users_ of JTC 1 standards
> and, hence, jeopardize JTC 1's _reputation_. Therefore, referring to
> clauses 13.2 (Fast Track) and 18.4.3.2 (PAS) of its Directives, JTC
> 1 reminds ITTF of its obligation to ascertain that a proposed DIS
> contains no evident contradiction with other ISO/IEC standards. JTC
> 1 offers any help to ITTF in such undertaking. However, should an
> _inconsistency_ be detected at any point in the ratification
> process, JTC 1 together with ITTF will take immediate action to cure
> the problem."
>
> Cheers
> Rick Jelliffe
> --
> DSDL members discussion list
>
> To unsubscribe, please send a message with the
> command "unsubscribe" to dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org
> (mailto:dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org?Subject=unsubscribe)
>

--
DSDL members discussion list
To unsubscribe, please send a message with the
command  "unsubscribe" to dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org
(mailto:dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org?Subject=unsubscribe)