This article is written in British English with Oxford spelling (colour, realize, organization, analyse; note that -ize is used instead of -ise) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Article history | |||
|
On 1 November 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to ISO. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
The current map is incorrect; Taiwan is marked as being an ISO member, but is not - it has no representation in the organization (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countries_in_the_International_Organization_for_Standardization). The previous map got this right (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ISO_Members.svg). Should the existing map be updated, or replaced with the older, correct version? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.142.121.165 (talk) 04:09, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
Edit: this one might be better, and also shows the distinction - clearly specifying "Other places with an ISO 3166-1 code who aren't members of ISO": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ISO_members.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.142.121.165 (talk) 04:11, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
What's the copyright status of the standard documents? They are for sale in the ISO website Davidme 03:29 Feb 5, 2003 (UTC)
[1]: The material on ISO Online is subject to the same conditions of copyright as ISO publications, and its use is subject to the user's acceptance of ISO's conditions of copyright for ISO publications, as set out below. Any use of the material, including reproduction in whole or in part to another Internet site, requires permission in writing from ISO.
[2] The short country names from ISO 3166-1 and the alpha-2 codes are made available by ISO at no charge for internal use and non-commercial purposes. The use of ISO 3166-1 in commercial products may be subject to a licence fee.
Is this GFDL-compatible? Davidme
While ISO standards are copywrited, most published final standards are the result of draft versions submitted or updated by members. The U.S. government's standards body NIST maintains that since these were frequently created with public funds, the draft version is public domain. Lou I 19:48, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)
The ISO (IMHO) is not an non-governmental organization. I expect to update the article in September to reflect that opinion, but have placed this note and will allow at least two weeks for comments. Lou I 19:48, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)
On the ISO website (here) I found this statement:
-- Heron
Heron and I have pretty well agreed to include something like the following statement: "While the ISO defines itself as an NGO, its ability to set standards which often become law makes it more powerful than most NGOs, and in practice it acts as a consortium with strong links to governments and major corporations." Lou I 18:56, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
History and 4 number label: I was hoping to get a brief history which explains its special and powerful role, its origins, growth and key moments of emergence of power, and presumably of replacing other organisations (IEC is still powerful in the electrotechnical field). I was also concerned that the second last paragraph describes the "ISO 99999:yyyy:title" label format standard, and the very next para. labels a standard as ISO 9660 Garry
About that format... That was confusing. Neither of the two examples given adheres strictly to the format, which seems pretty embarrassing. Can somebody who knows what he's doing correct that in whatever way it needs to be corrected? -- Anon
Okay, this one's probably been done to death, and if it has feel free to point me to the discussion (assuming it's archived somewhere). BUT... has it been decided by consensus somewhere that the ISO page should be a redirect here and not a disambiguation page that also points to ISO rating? I understand that ISO rating is an American standard and all, but right now if I search Wikipedia for ISO -all- I get is pointers to this page. ISO rating gets swallowed up and is pretty much unfindable. --Bcordes 17:21, Jun 30, 2004 (UTC)
I'm fairly new to Wiki, so I won't be surprised if I've missed this. Essentially, there is a very large group known as ISO/IEC Joint Technical Committee 1, that exists to handle the overlap in responsibilities for International Standardization between ISO and IEC. It consists of a number of sub-committees which are subsequently divided into working groups. I think there should be some type of entry for ISO/IEC JTC1, but I'm at a loss at how to apporach this. Should it be a stand-alone article or is there a way to link the ISO and IEC article together and capture the material?
I did find a single entry that referenced JTC1, but there was no link, not even a link to a non-existent article. Colin 23:22, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Thanks Heron. I've done that, hopefully what I've added makes sense. Continuing with my attempts to get a handle on the whole Wikipedia concept, I noticed that there was an abbreviated list of national bodies that contribute to IEC listed on that page. Obviously there is also a similar list for ISO. I would guess, though, that such a list would do better as its own article, "National Standards Organizations" or similar. Sort of like the link to a list of International Standards on this page (I haven't followed it yet to see what's there). Thoughts?
I really don't want to become known as "Mr Standards", I know the perfect individual for that title and I will never be as knowledgeable nor anal about standards as he is. I will, however, contribute as I can.
"...businesses started creating private consortia like W3C...". Huh? If I'm not mistaken, W3C is a non-profit open source organisation and certainly not privately owned. And I even believe that it already existed before private companies started to take part in it (because they realised that they could never surpass it through individual efforts). Though I'm not sure about that last bit. I'm in the middle of another edit so I don't have the time to research this now.
DirkvdM 08:43, 2005 Apr 19 (UTC)
Is "iso" (lower-case) a standard/accepted way to refer to ISO? I've never seen it -- except from slang referring to ISO-9660 disc images such as "I'll burn that iso now", which I believe to be not relevant to this article, or at least not meant as in the context "iso" was listed. I suggest removing the or "iso" bit at the opening paragraph. --LodeRunner 04:26, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
The article states a committee was formed but give no date at all.
"To deal with the consequences of substantial overlap in areas of standardization and work related to information technology, ISO and IEC formed a Joint Technical Committee known as the..."
When, dang it?
In what countries are the ISO standards followed? I suppose not all standards are followed everywhere, but some overview of which countries adhere to the most important ones or at least try to follow them would be useful, if only as an indication. Especially China is interresting since it contains at least 1/5 of the world population, but I haven't a clue what they use there. Or should I limit this question to the metric system? DirkvdM 10:57, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
In the paragraph "The name", ISO is referred to be a name from Greek, but in the first line, it is an acronym. Which choice to be held? --Ch. Rogel 10:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
References
((cite web))
: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
I've removed the added pronunciation guide for "most other languages", which read: [ˈaɪsəʊ], in most other languages [ˈɪsʊ]. Given that most other languages don't even possess the vowels given here, and that each probably has their own pronunciation for the word, I can't credit that there exists a single "non-English" pronunciation for ISO (and if there did, it would more likely be [iso], or perhaps [izo]). If someone has evidence in support of the other pronunciation, though, feel free to restore it. Thylacoleo 07:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
We have "The reason it is in all caps in writing is that it appears that way in the Organization's logo (above). " This is plainly ridiculous. There are countless organisations and companies that have all-caps logos, but we don't do this for them. Are there any better explanations? Crazeman 22:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Can a section on ISO Guides be started? I am interested in Guide 34.TJMQAM 21:03, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
How can you possibly consider a link to the ISO website in an article on ISO to be spam? That is rediculous! Please do not revert it agvain without providing an explanation. Jerry lavoie 22:51, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
NOT SPAM —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeepcomanche1 (talk • contribs) 03:33, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I liked the map on the article, but people with Daltonism like me will have trouble to understand it. Would someone be kind enough to change the colors? :) Thanks. Yes,I came to the discussion page for the same request.I have the same problem. My suggestion would be to replace red with blue.Thx.
I want to second this, it is very difficult to understand as someone with colorblindness, the dark shades look almost identical.
Does anybody else think it's amusing that the International Organization for Standardization logo is in both English and French? I guess they haven't gotten around to standardizing that yet.
anybody know where is the location of this organization? It's strange to look around and not to find the actual place where ISO Members meet! AshrafSS 05:07, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
http://webstore.ansi.org/ansidocstore/free_standards.asp link break. When I visit the link, it says “Sorry! The page cannot be found”. So anyone who know the correct link, update the link.
Regarding the link addition to the so-called ANSI search engine, this clearly states that it is a NATIONAL resource, and every result of search leads to the sales option from the ANSI shop! The sham is paper thin. It is a sales driver by a single national standards body.
If ANSI's was inserted, so should every other standards body's search facilities. It is a nonsense. These sorts of links belong on the articles for the national bodies themselves. In this case http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansi
SomeHuman continues to re-add the commercial ANSI sales link. The facts are above. This search 'front' returns items from the ANSI sales shop. SCC, BSI and many other orgs also have similar sale search facilities. NONE are appropriate here, because this article discusses ISO.
Also, if one WAS appropriate, it would be ISO's own search facility!
Yet SomeHuman continues to add the ANSI link, despite all these facts. Could someone from Wikipedia intervene? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.127.65.218 (talk) 10:39, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Please DISCUSS this issue, rather than engaging in edit wars. This is why there is a discussion page for each article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.127.65.218 (talk) 10:34, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Image:ISO French logo.svg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 05:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Image:ISO english logo.svg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 05:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Although ISO today generally represents the International Organization for Standards (sic *), it was orignally selected because it means Equal ... as in isobaric or isometric. I first read this back in 1995 from a quote by the Secretary General of the IOS organization when I was implementing ISO 9004 at my company. A search for further backup of this produced this quote taken from Searchdatacenter.com: According to ISO, "ISO" is not an abbreviation. It is a word, derived from the Greek isos, meaning "equal", which is the root for the prefix "iso-" that occurs in a host of terms, such as "isometric" (of equal measure or dimensions) and "isonomy" (equality of laws, or of people before the law). The name ISO is used around the world to denote the organization, thus avoiding the assortment of abbreviations that would result from the translation of "International Organization for Standardization" into the different national languages of members. Whatever the country, the short form of the organization's name is always ISO.
Aspensummer 20:39, 30 October 2007 (UTC)Aspensummer & 79.73.201.10 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) 22:07, 9 August 2008
Many have been tidied in recent days, and 1475+ since the beginning of the year:
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22International+Organization+for+Standardization (Correct Version: Z and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22International+Organisation+for+Standardisation (Acceptable Alternative: S and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22International+Organisation+for+Standardization (Inconsistent: S and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22International+Organization+for+Standardisation (Inconsistent: Z and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22International+Organization+for+Standards%22 (Incorrect Name: for standards and Plural and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22International+Organisation+for+Standards%22 (Incorrect Name: for standards and Plural and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22International+Organization+for+Standard%22 (Incorrect Name: for standard and Single and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22International+Organisation+for+Standard%22 (Incorrect Name: for standard and Single and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22International+Organization+of+Standardization%22 (Incorrect Name: of and Z and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22International+Organization+of+Standardisation%22 (Incorrect Name: of and Z and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22International+Organisation+of+Standardization%22 (Incorrect Name: of and S and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22International+Organisation+of+Standardisation%22 (Incorrect Name: of and S and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22International+Organization+of+Standards%22 (Incorrect Name: of standards and Plural and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22International+Organisation+of+Standards%22 (Incorrect Name: of standards and Plural and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22International+Organization+of+Standard%22 (Incorrect Name: of standard and Single and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22International+Organisation+of+Standard%22 (Incorrect Name: of standard and Single and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standardization+organization%22 (Incorrect Name: Z and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standardization+organisation%22 (Incorrect Name: Z and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standardisation+organization%22 (Incorrect Name: S and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standardisation+organisation%22 (Incorrect Name: S and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standards+organization%22 (Incorrect Name: Plural and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standards+organisation%22 (Incorrect Name: Plural and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standard+organization%22 (Incorrect Name: Single and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standard+organisation%22 (Incorrect Name: Single and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22organization+for+international+standardization%22 (Incorrect Name: for and Z and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22organization+for+international+standardisation%22 (Incorrect Name: for and Z and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22organisation+for+international+standardization%22 (Incorrect Name: for and S and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22organisation+for+international+standardisation%22 (Incorrect Name: for and S and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22organization+for+international+standards%22 (Incorrect Name: for standards and plural and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22organisation+for+international+standards%22 (Incorrect Name: for standards and plural and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22organization+for+international+standard%22 (Incorrect Name: for standard and single and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22organisation+for+international+standard%22 (Incorrect Name: for standard and single and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22organization+of+international+standardization%22 (Incorrect Name: of and Z and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22organization+of+international+standardisation%22 (Incorrect Name: of and Z and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22organisation+of+international+standardization%22 (Incorrect Name: of and S and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22organisation+of+international+standardisation%22 (Incorrect Name: of and S and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22organization+of+international+standards%22 (Incorrect Name: of and standards and plural and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22organisation+of+international+standards%22 (Incorrect Name: of and standards and plural and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22organization+of+international+standard%22 (Incorrect Name: of and standard and single and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22organisation+of+international+standard%22 (Incorrect Name: of and standard and single and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standardization+for+organization%22 (Incorrect Name: for and Z and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standardization+for+organisation%22 (Incorrect Name: for and Z and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standardisation+for+organization%22 (Incorrect Name: for and S and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standardisation+for+organisation%22 (Incorrect Name: for and S and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standards+for+organization%22 (Incorrect Name: for and Plural and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standards+for+organisation%22 (Incorrect Name: for and Plural and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standard+for+organization%22 (Incorrect Name: for and Single and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standard+for+organisation%22 (Incorrect Name: for and Single and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standardization+of+organization%22 (Incorrect Name: of and Z and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standardization+of+organisation%22 (Incorrect Name: of and Z and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standardisation+of+organization%22 (Incorrect Name: of and S and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standardisation+of+organisation%22 (Incorrect Name: of and S and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standards+of+organization%22 (Incorrect Name: of and Plural and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standards+of+organisation%22 (Incorrect Name: of and Plural and S)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standard+of+organization%22 (Incorrect Name: of and Single and Z)
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site:wikipedia.org+%22international+standard+of+organisation%22 (Incorrect Name: of and Single and S) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.73.229.140 (talk) 09:40, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
... and then there are all of those with "intenational" instead of "inteRnational" within too.
The current version of the article reads, literally, that International Organization for Standardization (Organisation internationale de normalisation), widely known as ISO, is a corrupt international standard-setting body composed of representatives from various national standards organizations... this is clearly POV and although I do not know what could be the reasons behind the claim, the link is given does not clearly state it and, even if it did, this is hardly the encyclopedic tone that one would expect from wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.45.251.100 (talk) 16:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
In the 'Name and abbreviation' section it says American English is one of the official languages of ISO. However, their website doesn't seem to support this. I can't find any explicit statement on the style of English they use, but their usage suggests it's not American, for example, they use the spellings 'centre', 'programme' and 'aluminium'. It appears to follow the Oxford spelling style, so I suggest we change it to that, but I would like to find a reference. Potahto (talk) 17:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
no entiendo nadita de lo que esta ahi asi k me voy a salir de la pagina bye bye
International Standards may be in English and/or French. They may be translated into national languages as part of adoption as a national standard. Japan does this, for example. My understanding is that any national version of English is allowed: it depends on which spell-checker the standard's editor wants to use. For example, Australian English is mid-way between US and British English in spelling: sometimes both variants are allowed: a standard written by an editor from Australia/Pacific/South East Asia could well use that. The editor has a deal of discretion: spelling is a non-issue compared to consistency. Rick Jelliffe (talk) 08:14, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
As the talk page heading clearly shows, the article is written in British English. Why then are some words in the article written in American English? This is most unprofessional.
Kslall8765 (talk) 16:36, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure about this, but it looks to me like the "Available Standards" link is broken. It now links to what looks to me like a container shipping company. However, my Spanish/Portugese isn't much good, so somewhere in there _may_ be a link to some ISO standards...
my comment at Talk:List of ISO standards#A topic of... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.64.219.44 (talk) 02:44, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
BTW, where is the Agricultural microbiology located in the division of ISO then?--222.64.219.44 (talk) 02:54, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
My this question is based on the following information
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=Agricultural+microbiology&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=title&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_allsubj=all&hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1
--222.64.219.44 (talk) 02:59, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
my comment at Talk:Standards organization#A topic of .... --222.67.209.134 (talk) 10:32, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
the following info of Codex Alimentarius and the following: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&q=allintitle%3A+FAO%2FWHO+standards&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&btnG=Search --222.67.209.134 (talk) 11:17, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
their standard publishing process??? Do their standard publishing belong to academic publishing or governmental rule-based publishing????
See my complaint about their publishing Talk:Dairy product#Literature review info of ISO 3594:1976 is needed..... --222.67.209.144 (talk) 03:50, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
I've got amused again ^___^. See my search http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=buy+site%3Awww.iso.org&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi= --222.67.209.144 (talk) 03:58, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
The description of the page is not precise and see the following search results
--222.64.222.139 (talk) 10:14, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
--222.67.213.223 (talk) 11:54, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
--222.64.222.139 (talk) 10:31, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
--222.64.222.139 (talk) 10:29, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
--222.67.213.223 (talk) 11:51, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
--222.64.222.139 (talk) 10:10, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
--222.64.222.139 (talk) 10:24, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
See my comment for terminology at Talk:List of ISO standards#Same problem for ISO 860....--222.64.222.139 (talk) 10:29, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
The term of FDIS is not searchable within the site but enabled by an external search engine
--222.64.21.59 (talk) 23:07, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
--222.64.21.59 (talk) 23:10, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Can the org establish the standards of Information technology -- Internal Systems Interconnection to some extent...???--222.64.21.59 (talk) 23:14, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Why are there two formats...??? - see the main topic--222.64.26.227 (talk) 22:33, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
The question is associated with the organizational management charts--222.64.26.227 (talk) 22:37, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
--222.64.26.227 (talk) 22:46, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
--222.64.26.227 (talk) 22:51, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:46, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
International Organization for Standardization → ISO — per WP:COMMONNAME and this discussion. Note that the ISO frequently bills itself as "ISO" for internationalization purposes and ISO redirects here. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:59, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
--222.64.22.162 (talk) 03:04, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
--222.64.22.162 (talk) 03:07, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
--222.64.22.162 (talk) 03:13, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
--222.64.22.162 (talk) 03:15, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
--222.64.22.162 (talk) 03:38, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
---
--222.64.22.162 (talk) 03:23, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
--222.64.22.162 (talk) 03:33, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
--222.64.22.162 (talk) 04:19, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
To me IWA can only become voluntary compliance if one wish whereas formal standards do not --222.64.22.162 (talk) 04:30, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
Unless to notify all the editors in a deliverable way. Otherwise please close this site, in case of misleading the public --222.64.22.162 (talk) 04:39, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
Wasn't paying attention and absolutely do not represent my employer in this issue. My dislike of this organization is my own. Still if someone wants to add the very amusing content below feel free to. Everyone knew ISO would end up with egg on its face all the way through the M$ farce xml standard.
Alex Brown, who presided over the ISO vote in April 2008 that ratified the spec as ISO convener of the OOXML Ballot Resolution Meeting, accused Microsoft of acting in bad faith for implementing a "transitional" variant of the OOXML spec and not the strict version in Office 2010.
"If Microsoft ships Office 2010 to handle only the Transitional variant of ISO/IEC 29500 they should expect to be roundly condemned for breaking faith with the International Standards community. This is not the format 'approved by ISO/IEC', it is the format that was rejected," —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.94.94.105 (talk) 21:23, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
for the sake of traceability. Otherwise a third party validation is required
Further information: Talk:Internet service provider § Info about the standardization of ISP.... |
The same principle is applied to Google scholar kind of services and this site --222.67.211.10 (talk) 09:58, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
and I leave it for ISO 690 panelles to fix it up --222.64.223.117 (talk) 01:10, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
I think this text has been more or less copied from the ISO webpage on the stages of standard development, which would explain the British spelling. (I didn't look closely, though, so I could be wrong.) At any rate, it talks about "P-members", but there's no explanation of what such a person (organization?) is. What is a P-member? Mcswell (talk) 19:15, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
--222.67.207.250 (talk) 02:37, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
From the above search results, it can be seen that the ISO guides may not be less than ISO standards. Therefore, a topic for the list is very much necessary --222.64.218.64 (talk) 09:53, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
--222.64.218.64 (talk) 10:00, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
--222.64.218.64 (talk) 10:01, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
--222.64.218.64 (talk) 10:02, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
From my experience, reviewing of outdated standards are very labor intensive and it's impossible to renew them on time at all time. However, a warning sign should be given if outdated standards are in use. This measure can only apply to the cases when no scientific contradictions are present --222.64.218.64 (talk) 10:48, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
The same principle could be applied to the food items bought from supermarkets, which could be expired and discouted before sale but still in good conditions. Such measures can prevent unnecesary disposals enormously, since in many cases the expiry dates are not set on the bases of scientific data especially in food industry. However, for the shelf life decided based on scientific data, no compromise should be waived
--222.64.218.64 (talk) 10:45, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Why does this discussion page concern milk expiration dates? The article has nothing to do with food and doesn't mention it, and I don't see any information regarding a merger. Is this attached to the wrong article? —Długosz (talk) 15:29, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
I can't seem to find any infobox template for an ISO standard. That seems like an obvious omission to me. Am I missing something? If there really isn't such a beast, what sort of fields should be included in such a template? Macwhiz (talk) 17:23, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
In the infobox it says that the official languages are English, French, and Russian. Under the Name and abbreviation section, though, it says there are only two official languages: Enlish and French. Is this a mistake? --Akhil 0950 (talk) 18:37, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
I suggest that we should archive some old sections of this talk page. Does anyone want to set up an auto-archive? Does anyone object to my setting one one up? Does anyone have any preferences for MiszaBot or ClueBot III? (I've not set up an auto-archive before, but I'm prepared to give it a go if no-one else does it, and no-one objects.) Mitch Ames (talk) 02:38, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
I propose that the accessdate formats for the references should all be yyyy-mm-dd per ISO 8601, in line with the spirit of WP:STRONGNAT. (This would reverse some, but not all, of this edit.) ISO itself uses ISO 8601 on its standards. Mitch Ames (talk) 09:39, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
As the editor who made the most recently cited edit, I think this is a really good idea which never occurred to me. Frequently, when I find a non-British-related article that uses the dmy date format, I will check the article’s history and find that it used the mdy format for many years before someone arbitrarily changed it to dmy. In these cases, as in this article (I never saw your July post), I will change it back per WP:DATERET. However, it seems only appropriate that ISO formats should be used in the article about the ISO itself. One problem is that there is no equivalent template to ((use mdy dates)) and ((use dmy dates)), so one would have to be created, which should be easy as these templates don’t really do anything except add the article to the appropriate category. Hgrosser (talk) 05:15, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
For articles about modern writers or their works, it is sometimes decided to use the variety of English in which the subject wrote ...
It is not explicitly mentioned in the article whether this organisation is for-profit or non-profit. The hefty fee just to look at a standard seems to indicate the former but since there are other financial sources than fees mentioned, they don't seem to cover the expenses. Also, if the ISO should indeed be non-profit, are there tendencies within the ISO to cease being a dinosaur and embrace the 21st century by CCing their standards? --Mudd1 (talk) 15:41, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
I've requested a reference for "The organization states that ISO is not an acronym or initialism for the organization's full name in any official language." Neither [4] nor [5] state that "ISO is not an acronym ... in any ... language".
65.121.228.201 deleted the entire Criticism section with the comment "It's rife with POV and isn't proper encyclopedic style". I disagree, and have restored it. The section appears to be well referenced. Perhaps it needs editing for neutrality, but simply deleting the entire section seems inappropriate. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:30, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
I would recommend my successor that it is perhaps time to pass WG1’s outstanding standards over to OASIS (Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards), where they can get approval in less than a year and then do a PAS submission to ISO, which will get a lot more attention and be approved much faster than standards currently can be within WG1.
It is said in the article that ISO is a "body."
I don't think this definition is an appropriate one. What is a "body"?
This "body" word should be crlarified.
It should also be mentioned who assigns the members of the board (or executives).--144.122.104.211 (talk) 21:41, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
According to the wayback machine, the logo changed sometime between May 2012 and September 2012. The logo no longer includes the words. Hence the whole 'Name and abbreviation section is now incorrect. The logos are not in two of the official languages. The 'usually referred to by its short name' does not seem to accurately capture what ISO says about itself.
We, the International Organization for Standardization, own the registered trademarks for our short name, "ISO".
Nous – l’Organisation internationale de normalisation – sommes propriétaires des marques enregistrées pour notre nom court, « ISO ».
It would be best to say:
The three official languages of the ISO are English, French and Russian.[3] The organisation is known as the International Organization for Standardization in English, l’Organisation internationale de normalisation in French and Международная организация по стандартизации in Russian.
As the organisation's website makes clear:
Because 'International Organization for Standardization' would have different acronyms in different languages (IOS in English, OIN in French for Organisation internationale de normalisation), our founders decided to give it the short form ISO. ISO is derived from the Greek isos, meaning equal. Whatever the country, whatever the language, the short form of our name is always ISO.
However, one of the founding delegates, Willy Kuert, recollected the original naming question with the comment: "I recently read that the name ISO was chosen because 'iso' is a Greek term meaning 'equal'. There was no mention of that in London!"[5]
The logo and the name ISO are both registered trademarks, and their use is restricted.[6]
None that back-formation of ISO into International Standards (or Standardization) Organisation is ambiguous. This would be unclear as to whether International was qualifying Standardization (an Organisation for International Standardization) or Organisation (an International Organisation for Standardization).87.112.25.173 (talk) 21:54, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
I am writing several articles on project management as part of the ASCE Body of Knowledge project ( or ASCE BoK) as well as the Project Management Institute Body of Knowledge project ( or PM BoK). ISO cites and parallels a lot of the materials.... Thanks ...
Risk Engineer (talk) 17:53, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
The graphic on this page lists Namibia as a "Correspondent member", while the table here lists Namibia as a "full member (member body)" — Preceding unsigned comment added by DaemonBreed (talk • contribs) 22:10, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Atleast 2 apparently reliable sources (the Czech standards office and a professor in Die Zeit) mention 1928 as date of foundation for the predecessor organization ISA - the date is also shown in the article's plague image. I have added a maintenance tag about this contradiction with the current article (1926) for now. According to the Die Zeit article it seems like negotiations may have begun in 1926, but the organization was formally established in 1928. If these sources are correct, the date should be changed to 1928; preparatory negotiations usually do not count as "foundation" for an organization without a formal act. I am not sure which version is correct - a more knowledgeable editor should check and clarify this detail. GermanJoe (talk) 07:33, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on International Organization for Standardization. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check))
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:21, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Diannaa removed content without telling me what it was. Do I have the right to defend? Seems no. S/he portraits me as copyright violator, but does not show any proof. [6]. In the history it says
Diannaa (talk | contribs) at 20:38, 25 July 2017 (remove copyright content copied from http://qms-service.blogspot.ca/2011/04/how-to-use-iso-catalogue.html or elsewhere).
I have never been at that blog!!! Aleksander2017 (talk) 20:48, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
Could we create a table of the standards that can be sorted? The ISO website is un-navigable and it would be very helpful to have all standards listed somewhere. I know this will be huge piece of work but wanted to flag it would be of immense value, especially for non-experts people searching for a way in! Jack Nunn 04:24, 11 May 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacknunn (talk • contribs)
Thank you it's a good start but I meant a table that could be sorted, say by category, date etc. Structured data. Also didn't realise they are not open access!!Jack Nunn Jacknunn ([[7]]) 13:09, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Iso. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 3#Iso until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. eviolite (talk) 23:43, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
The short name ISO is pronounced as /ˈaɪsoʊ/ and not /aɪ ɛs oʊ/. This incorrect latter form is frequently encountered, especially in photography when referring to film speed ("ISO setting"). In fact there are many books and videos which refer to ISO as an initialism for International Standards Organization, also incorrect. See earlier discussion, especially FlippingBinary's comments. For this reason, I think it would be good to explicitly state that ISO is *not* pronounced as separate letters, but as one word to help deter these commonly held misconceptions. Syu5488 (talk) 03:33, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
Can someone add some rough estimate? Right now I don't know how many people work for ISO in total. I understand this is hard to measure but some approximate number would be fine + source. Right now I simply don't know and I came to wikipedia with that question. 2A02:8388:1600:A200:7F68:61BB:BDB:FB57 (talk) 04:08, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
What are the iso role in international trand in need the information for my monograph thanks 203.171.100.12 (talk) 05:35, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. Per consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) – robertsky (talk) 14:24, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
International Organization for Standardization → ISO – Per WP:COMMONNAME and MOS:ACROTITLE: "Acronyms should be used in a page name if the subject is known primarily by its abbreviation and that abbreviation is primarily associated with the subject". PhotographyEdits (talk) 13:36, 1 November 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 00:51, 9 November 2023 (UTC)