Acronyms and Language explained

Teched Information
& Links INDEX page

TC67 Portal

HOMEPAGE of this Standards Web Site (for TC67, CEN, OGP and other info.)

1. Target Dates and Stages

ISO/TC67 asks that all projects have target dates that are proposed when a New Work Item Proposal is circulated, and are confirmed or revised by the responsible Technical Committee or Subcommittee during the project. ISO/TC67 uses the stage publication dates as the milestones for progress, viz.(with ISO stage numbers):

• completion of first working draft (20.20)
• circulation of Committee Draft (30.20)
• launch of DIS Enquiry (40.20)
• start of FDIS final vote (50.20)
• publication of International Standard (60.60)

For a full explanation of ISO stages, please refer to ISO/IEC Directives Part 1.

2. Time Limits

The ISO Technical Management Board (TMB) has set time limits for the standards development process. . If a project has not reached publication stage after 7 years, it shall be automatically cancelled.  If a work item has not moved for 3 years or longer, it shall be automatically cancelled.  In either case, reinstating of a work item requires a new NP ballot. 

Ref. ISO TMB Resolutions 55/1998 and 8/2001

3. Project Programme

The Management Committee of ISO/TC67 has developed the "typical project programme" shown in Figure 1. This programme is based on several years of experience of developing new International Standards, firstly with using a "model programme" developed by TC67 in 1995 and secondly by measuring actual progress. It reflects an "average" of what is achieved if a project is pro-actively managed and avoids problems such as requiring repeated CD or DIS circulations. It is offered to assist the ISO Project Leader and other responsible persons in developing a programme and target dates specific for a project, while meeting the time limits set by the TMB.  The considerations for revisions and amendments of International Standards are similar, however less time may be required for technical work.

Key learnings incorporated in the typical project programme are as follows:

• Elapsed time from CD (30.20) to DIS (40.20) is typically 12 months including preparation of the second language version;
• Elapsed time from DIS (40.20) to FDIS (50.20) is typically 14 months, including some allowance for updating the second language version;
• ISO CS aspire to start the FDIS vote (50.20) within 3 months of Registration (50.00)
• for well-prepared documents, the elapsed time from FDIS (50.20) to publication (60.60) is typically 4 months (and the ISO CS target is 4 months);
• The desired time target of 36 months from "start" (20.00)  to FDIS Registration (50.00) can normally be achieved only if a PWI "Preliminary Work Item" process (00.20) is followed in order to prepare a working draft before the project becomes an AWI "Approved Work Item" (20.00).

Figure 1 - Typical Project Programme (rev. June 2001)
click for explanations >>  Acronyms (PWI etc.)   Project Stages

When developing a programme for a specific project, the following should be considered:

• there is a variety of opportunities for accelerating both the ISO process itself and the times within the process;
• "black holes" (where the project makes no progress due to not knowing who is responsible for the next action) can occur if the project is not constantly monitored;
• for a new document, a first working draft should be prepared before circulating the NWI Proposal (10.20). See below for a suggested process that manages the risks;
• for a revision or amendment, attach an outline of the technical changes proposed and, where appropriate, identify the specific clause numbers to be revised;
• a document needs to be sent to ISO CS at least one month before the DIS target date (40.20) or three months before if the second language version is then to start being prepared, and three months before the FDIS target date (50.20).
• ISO CS is on holiday for the month of August and for two weeks over Christmas.

Effective project management and a good knowledge of the ISO process is required in order to take advantage of the opportunities for more rapid progress, and to avoid "black holes" and other causes of delay. Some special considerations and some opportunities for short-cutting the process are set out below.

4. Special Considerations

Committee work needs to be completed some months before the DIS and FDIS target dates. At the DIS and FDIS stages, there are three important sub-stages in the process, as follows:

the "Ready for DIS" or "Ready for FDIS" document is completed by the committee and sent by the Secretariat to ISO CS in Geneva (stage 30.99 or 40.99). A document sent as "Ready for FDIS" must be accompanied by the DIS comments register.

the document is reviewed by ISO CS and, if acceptable, it is "Registered" (stage 40.00 or 50.00). If the document is not acceptable it may be sent back. If the document requires some editing by ISO CS, this can delay Registration. To avoid these problems, the "Ready for …" document should be truly "Ready" on the ISO Template and with all drawings and figures in appropriate format.

the document is issued by ISO CS for DIS Enquiry (40.20) or for FDIS final vote (50.20). From Registration, this may take one or two months for a DIS, and three or four months for a FDIS.

Unless otherwise agreed, both English and French language versions are required for DIS enquiry, and ISO CS may wait for sixty days for completion of the second version. It is often possible to agree (with AFNOR for the French version) to defer this until FDIS, or even until after publication.

ISO-CEN parallel processing under the Vienna Agreement - a third language (German) version is required for the CEN Enquiry (ISO DIS stage) and CEN Final Vote (ISO FDIS stage). The Secretary of the responsible ISO committee (TC or SC) is required to send the document direct to DIN (email to translation@din.de and copy to helmut.wolff@din.de) for German translation at the same time that it is sent to ISO CS for registration (i.e. at the same time that it is sent to AFNOR for the French translation). However, prior to the CEN Enquiry/DIS stage it is possible to request DIN to not require a German version; if granted by DIN this could reduce the work required for DIS.

API/ISO and API/ISO-CEN parallel processing: API committees meet at pre-determined times, therefore ISO programmes may require adjustment in order to accommodate API committee reviews and "special letter ballots", if the responsible ISO committee and ISO Project Leader are trying to work together with API committee and API task force.  ISO/TC67 strongly encourages joint working with API whenever possible, with the goal of parallel process and one set of words.

When the ISO Central Secretariat editor has prepared the FDIS ready for final vote, it has been agreed for ISO/TC67 that the Secretary of the responsible committee will be sent a proof copy for a maximum two-week review. This provides an opportunity for any gross errors that may have been inadvertently introduced during the final editing process to be identified and corrected prior to FDIS voting. TC67 recommends that the relevant Project Leader (or WG Convenor) should be requested to make this review. The normal rigorous proof reading during the FDIS voting period remains the responsibility of the relevant committee Secretariat and TC67 recommends that the relevant Project Leader (or WG Convenor) should also make this review.

5. Opportunities for Shortcutting the ISO Process

The DIS Enquiry stage is required for every ISO Standard project. And, except if the "fast track" procedure is invoked, all projects must also undergo the NWIP (New Work Item Proposal) process where at least five P-Members must nominate experts to participate. All other stages may be skipped if the circumstances are favourable.

Go direct to DIS (or to CD):

At the NWIP Stage, attach a full draft and request the voting P-Members to "tick the box" to agree that the document proceed direct to DIS (or direct to CD if it so considered not ready for DIS). See suggested process, below.

Skip the CD Stage:

The TMB accepts the possibility for committees to agree that working drafts be submitted directly for processing as draft International Standards, thereby eliminating the committee stage.

Ref. ISO TMB Resolution 11/1998

If a final Working Draft is prepared "Ready for DIS" then the TC or SC may take a Resolution to forward the document for DIS Registration.

Skip the FDIS Stage:

The TMB accepts that when a DIS has received 100% approval from the member bodies voting, the committee secretariat may propose exemption from the FDIS approval stage, on condition that :

* 1) the ISO/CS confirms that this appropriate and in cases of dispute refers the matter to the TMB

* 2) the approval stage is maintained for all standards being developed in parallel with CEN or IEC

Although this obviates the need for a formal 2-month vote on the final proof, there is still the ISO editing and composition process to be completed, followed by the need to examine the final proof carefully and discuss changes with ISO CS, therefore the time saving arising from skipping FDIS may not be as great as anticipated.

Ref. ISO TMB Resolution 11/1998

6. Process for developing the draft of a new International Standard

When proposing a new International Standard, it is recommended that a first working draft is prepared before the "clock" is started on the ISO process. The draft should be attached to the New Work Item Proposal form. This allows the experts to develop the new document at whatever speed and in whatever manner is necessary and then to achieve or improve upon the typical project programme presented in Figure 1 above.

The risk arising from this approach is that the NWI Proposal, when presented, will fail to have adequate support. A NWI Proposal may fail for several reasons, for example:

a simple majority of the voting P-Members may be not attained;

experts may be nominated from less that five of the P-Members.

It is recommended that a process be followed to manage this risk. The process should be one that ensures that there is an industry need for the document, and that all the stakeholders have contributed. A suggested process is as follows:

The proposed title, scope, name of the base document (if any) and name of the proposed ISO Project Leader should be circulated to the P-Members of the relevant TC or SC at least three months prior to its next meeting;

The proposed ISO Project Leader should identify experts from at least four further P-Members so that their names are made known to the relevant P-Member delegates;

At its next meeting the responsible TC or SC should take a Resolution to start work on a Preliminary Work Item. The Resolution should define the title and scope, and should name the prospective ISO Project Leader and further experts from at least four further P-Members. A target date should be set for delivery of a document that is ready for circulation as a New Work Item Proposal.

The draft document should be prepared with consideration of input from all stakeholders. The document need not be prepared "in ISO", it could for example be prepared in an API Task Force with the international experts included.

If possible (if all stakeholders are adequately represented and satisfied) prepare the draft as though it will be "Ready for DIS" (i.e. to ISO rules and using the ISO Template).

At the NWIP (New Work Item Proposal) stage (10.20) ensure that at least five P-Members state the name of their expert when voting. If appropriate, request the voting P-Members to "tick the box" for the DIS (or the CD) to be prepared next.

When approved, the project becomes an AWI "Approved Work Item". The comments received with the NWI vote should be addressed in order to prepare the DIS (or CD) if agreed.

Acronyms and Language explained

Teched Information
& Links INDEX page

TC67 Portal

HOMEPAGE of this Standards Web Site (for TC67, CEN, OGP and other info.)