With a new year it seems to be a blogging tradition to make some predictions for the coming 12 months. A number of predictions have duly materialised in the blogosphere about DIS 29500 standardisation. At the risk of pouring cold water on some of them, here is a round-up of the state of things in the run up to the BRM in Geneva.

BRM delegation sizes fixed

National Standards Bodies have submitted their proposed delegations for the BRM to JTC 1 and, as anticipated, some have been reduced in size to fit the venue, which takes 120 people.

In all, 40 countries (plus Ecma) are sending delegations, and 14 of them (of more than four people) have been scaled back. The result is that delegations will vary in size between 1 and 6 people — this (precedented) adjustment hardly represents the sort of “disenfranchisement” that was being anxiously predicted in some quarters.

Given the purpose of the BRM the pattern of attendance, as expected, reflects a skeptical stance towards the DIS: 27 delegations are from countries that either disapproved or abstained in the September letter ballot.

Critical role of the Heads of Delegations

It is something of an honour, in my opinion, to be appointed Head of Delegation (HoD) by one’s National Standards Body, and at the BRM this role will carry greater than usual weight. A few points are worth making about HoDs’ responsibilities.

First, the HoD will be responsible for registering votes at the BRM (and it is worth re-iterating that any voting at the BRM is voting on the text, not voting on approval of the standard);

Secondly, in any voting, the HoD (in common with the whole delegation) will be presenting their National Body opinion, not their personal one. This (which is normally the case anyway) is especially emphasised in the JTC 1 directives, which state that BRM delegation members are “representatives who are well aware of the NB’s position”;

Finally, the HoDs play an important role in maintaining order during the meeting, since they are responsible for running their own delegation and keeping it in order.

Random agendas?

The agenda for the BRM will be published soon, probably later this month. While the details are yet to be finalised it is clear that the agenda will not be “random” — in a five-day meeting of 120 people that would be a recipe for disaster. It is also clear that the mainspring of the agenda will be the body of comments submitted by National Standards Bodies in the 2 September ballot. A secondary consideration will naturally be the responses the submitter (Ecma) has made to those comments. Assuming comments are partitioned into common clusters, (e.g. by parts of the DIS) then within each cluster there are likely to be three categories of submitter response:

• straightforward acceptance (everyone agrees on the comment, its NB-proposed remedy is adopted as is);
• modified acceptance (the gist of the comment is accepted, the proposed response differs from that originally suggested);
• non-acceptance/non-response (the comment is not accepted).

There is little to be gained dwelling in areas where everyone is in agreement, and so I expect the meeting to move quickly through batches of comments which have straightforward acceptance. This will leave time for review of the more contentious responses. Inevitably, there is likely to be insufficient time to review all comments in detail – in this case, some will be held until later in the BRM; others will be deferred to maintenance (should the DIS get approved).

Kyoto aftermath

Following informal discussions with some NBs in Kyoto, I think it is perhaps worth re-emphasising that the BRM will be a meeting which concerns itself with the DIS 29500 text, the comments NBs made on it in the 2 September ballot, and Ecma's proposed responses to these comments. The FAQ already spells out some topics which are out-of-scope, and in addition the following should be noted:

• the JTC 1 Directives make clear that comments NBs may have after 2 September are out-of-scope: “comments received after the normal voting period will not be taken into account, except that they will be submitted to the appropriate SC Secretariat for consideration at the time of the next review of the IS in question” (13.6)
• the behaviour and conformance level of any applications which claim to implement DIS 29500 is irrelevant to the standardisation process. ISO/IEC standards have to be complete in themselves without reference to applications, to avoid the possibility of difference (and thus divided authority) between the text itself and any so-called “reference” implementation. In other words, MS Office will not be discussed.

Other Geneva meetings?

It seems the OpenForum Europe is organising a meeting to coincide with the BRM: same time, same venue. It’s not clear from the announcement what time of day this seminar is scheduled to take place, though an invitation is issued to BRM attendees. I will be disappointed if those involved in this event expect BRM delegates abandon their work in session to attend this meeting, as that can only diminish legitimate participation in this important ballot resolution process.