Freely Available Iso Standards

[Pavan Outlaw]

HTS are adopted, typically in the context of EU product legislation, by European Standardisation Organisations (ESOs), further to a mandate issued by the European Commission. They establish technical specifications that can be voluntarily used by manufacturers to comply with the technical and safety requirements set in EU legislation. They provide a presumption of conformity with the applicable rules and, therefore, are typically relied on by manufacturers.

Two nonprofit organisations made a request to the European Commission under Regulation (EC) 1049/2001 and Regulation (EC) 1367/2006 for access to four HTS adopted by the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN) under the Toy Safety Directive 2009/48/EC. The European Commission refused to grant the nonprofit organisations access to the four standards.

The AG further concluded that HTS, as acts that are part of EU law, implement EU legislation and produce legal effects. Therefore, the AG took the view that they should be made freely available without charge and also entirely published in the Official Journal of the European Union to ensure enforceability and accessibility by the public at large.

Even if HTS could benefit from copyright protection (quod non), the AG concluded that free access to the law should take precedence over commercial interests which, in the present case, have not even been demonstrated and assessed.

In the opinion adopted on 22 June 2023, the AG argued that the judgment under appeal must be set aside, the contested decision must be annulled, and the European Commission must be ordered to grant the appellants access to the four requested standards for the reasons outlined above.

The findings of the Court of Justice also may result in the need to revise Regulation 1025/2012, so as to require the content of the HTS to be published in the Official Journal of the European Union or made available without any charge not only to manufacturers but also, more generally, to the public.

The majority of standards developing organizations depend on the revenue from the sale of standards to support their programs and services. But a growing number of standards organizations make access to their standards for viewing or download available for no cost. sco [at] nist.gov (Let us know) if your organization should be added to this list.

At times, organizations will make their standards freely available. Most of the time there is no registration required and standards can be downloaded from the internet; however, sometimes individuals are required to register to receive the free standards. If this is the case, it is noted in the link description.

Being mostly interested in the ISO C and C++ standards, I wonder why programming language standards for ISO/IEC 23270:2006 C# and ISO/IEC 16262:2011 ECMAScript are publicly available from the ISO website, whereas standards for C and C++, and possibly other languages are not. What is the rationale behind the decisions to make these certain programming language standards publicly available, but not standards for other programming languages?

Because, as described here and here, the C# and ECMAScript standards were developed by ECMA and later adopted by ISO. ECMA, which is a consortium of companies, makes its standards freely available; ISO, which is an aggregation of public entities, does not. In the case of C# and ECMAScript the original policy wins.

So, I guess that's their reasoning, but it's not very deep of course. For some reason those particular standards listed seem to have been considered more important to have freely available so that various parties can use them to standardize.

The 2023 CD and Flash Drive each contain 287 current ASAE/ASABE Standards, Engineering Practices, and Data applicable to agricultural equipment and systems, irrigation and drainage, structures, turf and landscape equipment, food engineering, and electric power applications. The CD and Flash Drive also include the adoptions of international standards for which ASABE documents were not used as the basis. However, they do not include historic standards, withdrawn standards, or earlier versions of current standards as of the time they were produced. This media includes a keyword and numerical standards index and a list of active standards development projects. A limited number of searchable CDs and Flash Drives are available.

A Publicly Available Specification or PAS is a standardization document that closely resembles a formal standard in structure and format but which has a different development model.[1] The objective of a Publicly Available Specification is to speed up standardization. PASs are often produced in response to an urgent market need.[2]

BSI Group develops PASs in the UK,[1] while the International Electrotechnical Commission develops international PASs in the arena of electrical, electronic and related technologies,[2] and the International Organization for Standardization develops international ISO PASs.[3]

BSI Group pioneered the PAS format. Under the BSI model, any organization, association or group who wish to document standardized best practice on a specific subject, can commission a PAS, subject to the BSI acceptance process. A British Standard and a PAS must reach full consensus between all stakeholders on technical content. The timescale for the development of a PAS can be shorter, typically around 8 months, and is why it is sometimes referred to as a 'fast-track standard'.[4]

The development of a PAS cannot conflict with, or contradict, existing or draft work within the formal standards arena and must complement, not conflict with, any legislation in the subject area. It is also written in accordance with BS drafting rules, which means that the content must be technically robust and cannot be technically constrained (i.e. it cannot include patented or proprietary methods or products). It is written unambiguously and with objectively verifiable requirements or recommendations.[1]

According to a BSI document "Principles of PAS standardization" "The term PAS was originally an acronym derived from "publicly available specification". However, not all PAS documents are structured as specifications and the term is now sufficiently well established not to require any further amplification." However, early examples of PAS were actually titled "Product Approval Specification" as illustrated in the accompanying photograph showing part of PAS 003, and may not be equivalent to PAS standards as they are used today.

Micro Free (formerly M100 Free) includes read-only access to critical microbiology standards. These standards are essential for better patient outcomes and reducing antimicrobial resistance. CLSI is committed to making resources broadly available to users around the globe to save lives and improve patient health.

The College of American Pathologists (CAP) is introducing two new requirements for clinical laboratories to use updated breakpoints (BPs) when interpreting antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) results. CAP has recognized that some laboratories are using obsolete breakpoints, even when devices have achieved US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) clearance for updates, which could lead to adverse consequences in managing patients.

Together CLSI, Association of Public Health Laboratories (APHL), American Society for Microbiology (ASM), College of American Pathologists (CAP), and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), have jointly developed this Breakpoint Implementation Toolkit (BIT) to assist clinical laboratories in updating minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) breakpoints.

This document provides guidance for laboratory and health care leadership for development, implementation, and sustainment of effective emergency preparedness plans (all hazards) supporting nonanalytical components of clinical and public health laboratory services that may pertain to various natural and manmade disasters.

This document provides guidelines for a quality proficiency testing/external quality assessment program, including reliable databases; design control in the choice of materials and measurands; good manufacturing processes; documentation procedures; complaint handling; corrective and preventive action plans; and responsive timing of reports.

This document presents the core infrastructure for a standardized error tracking system with the primary goals of reducing risk and increasing quality of point-of-care testing, while accumulating standardized data for benchmarking use.

CLSI uses cookies to ensure the best website experience. Continuing without changing cookie settings assumes you consent to our use of cookies on this device. You can change these settings at any time, but that may impair functionality on our websites. Review our privacy policy.

By making available vital building blocks, the IEEE GET Program for AI Ethics and Governance Standards will help contribute to creating AI systems which are more trustworthy and further the goal of raising awareness and understanding of the importance of the AI ethics issues and how they can be addressed. The program can help AI developers incorporate human-centric design principles into their product roadmaps and organizational and governance structures, and to level up business processes such as procurement, marketing, and risk management.

With support from the IEEE SA, industry sponsors and government, a number of IEEE standards are available for download at no cost through the IEEE GET Program. Access the new IEEE GET Program for AI Ethics Governance Standards on the IEEE Xplore Digital Library.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

After publication, readers who encounter refusal by the authors to comply with these policies should contact the chief editor of the journal. In cases where editors are unable to resolve a complaint, the journal may refer the matter to the authors' funding institution and/or publish a formal statement of correction, attached online to the publication, stating that readers have been unable to obtain necessary materials to replicate the findings.

c80f0f1006