<H1><FONT size=2>I am in some disagreement with Gerard; I feel that running use as a standard (that is a needs-based standard, however particular the need) serves its purpose, whether for the internet or elsewhere, although this can result in quite a hodgepodge.</FONT></H1>
(I also feel that the United Nations needs to evaluate existing standards in the light of running use, and revamp them, much the way dictionaries are revamped regularly.<BR>
So running use is for me important.)<BR>
--C. E. Whitehead<BR>
<A href="mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org"><EM>email@example.com</EM></A><EM> </EM><BR>
<H1> </H1><EM>Tue Mar 17 13:55:19 CET 2009 </EM>
<BR><PRE><EM>> Dear Stéphane Bortzmeyer,
> The question is not what is your or my personal opinion, but what does the position of international law today in force !
> The international treaty establishing the intergovernmental UN agency WTO (World Trade Organization), now having 153 members parts (149 member States, Taiwan, Macao, Hong-Kong and the European Union), comprises a TBT protocol (Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade), whose Article 1.1 writes:
> "1.1 General terms for standardization and procedures for assesment of conformity shall normally have the meaning given to them by definitions adopted within the United Nations system and by internaztional standardizing bodies taking into account their context and in the light of the object and purpose of this agreement"
> The combination of this article 1.1 with Annex 1 (terms and definitions for the purpose of this agreement, that explicitely refers to the ISO/IEC Guide 2: 1991) and Annex 3 (Code of good practice for the preparation, adoption and application of standards) makes it clear that only standards issued from ISO, or IEC ,or ITU ,or UN/CEFACT at international level, or the corresponding regional and national bodies at regional or national levels, are recognized as "de jure standards" for the application of the international law on commerce.
> Gérard LANG