ISO is somewhat unique in requiring you to pay money to even know what the standard says before you can ever think about being in compliance.
Most other standards organizations (i.e. NIST, IETF, W3C) do not have this weird financial burden, so merely "Publicly Available Standards" doesn't sell the significance of this.
Making their standards publicly available is a good move by ISO. I hope we see more of this.
In my industry (machine design, industrial automation), almost all of the standards cost money. UL, CSA, NSF, ANSI, ASME, BSi, IEC, ISO, DIN, etc. Our library contains many thousands of dollars worth of documents, and it costs many more to keep them up to date. If your company has a slow or complicated purchasing process, it's a real hinderance when you realize you need a standard and have to stop working so you can deal with acquiring it.
I think the only ones that are freely available are NFPA 70 (national electric code), NFPA 79 (electrical standard for industrial machinery), but if you want to download or print them, you still have to pay.
You can go a long way with cargo-cult designs, and a ton of companies get by with approximations, but there are a ton of mistakes made because ANSI/ISO/DIN/IEC refuse to make the documents available for free.
But maybe the next project will be outside of the medical field.
Sure does! First line from a random page (44) of 61362:2012: "...the runner blade opening is brought to a certain position to provide a given flow rate after load..."
Anything you claim compliance or certification with, though... that's your core business we're talking about! At least buy those from Estonia!
Among all the other advantages noted here, it leads to a much shorter development cycle and a greater number of people participating -- people whose energy is invaluable.
AFAIK ISO is funded by their paywall and as an international treaty organisation is probably far harder to reform than industry organisations, so I don't have much hope for this to change.
ISO's attitude to this was recently expressed on Twitter: https://nitter.snopyta.org/MetaCatie/status/1368910356664483...
ISO even takes freely available standards from other organizations and paywalls them, even reneging on previous agreements to make a standard freely available, for example: https://www.theregister.com/2021/06/18/schematron_standard_p...
Afaik there were always publicly available standards in the ISO portfolio. Is this list new?
> If the title includes the name of the site, please take it out, because the site name will be displayed after the link.
e.g. if this had been 'ISO announces publicly available standards' on iso.org itself, the submitter should (or if not and a popular/noticed submission, a mod would) change it to the 'Publicly available standards' that it is.