Talk:Ecma International

	Telecommunication portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Organizations

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Accuracy questioned: The Ecma Office Open XML formats[edit]

This article says that Ecma has become more "widely-recognized" due to Microsoft submitting its OOXML format to them for standardization. The reference links to the OOXML page on Wikipedia, which has nothing about Ecma becoming more widely-recognized as a result of OOXML. The fact that Ecma has probably received thousands of submissions yet this one is given its own section in the Ecma article makes me question not only the accuracy of the section but also the intent of its author. SteveSims 18:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed it. Please review. Alsh 17:00, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TODO[edit]

todo: write about ECMA's role in various programming languages of late; perhaps linking to them

Confusing statements[edit]

Is the proper title for the article ECMA, ECMA International, or Ecma International? What exactly is this article about? --Fang Aili 20:11, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article has the proper title, as "Ecma International" is the current name of the organization. I reworded the introductory paragraph to explain that better:

Ecma International, or the European association for standardising information and communication systems, is a standards organization. It acquired the name Ecma International in 1994, when the European Computer Manufacturers Association (ECMA) changed its name in order to reflect the international activities of the organisation. The long form of "ECMA" was dropped then and capitalization changed to reflect this.

With the new wording, do you still think the article needs cleanup in order "to meet Wikipedia's quality standards" or is it OK to remove the {{cleanup}} tag now? The Rod 20:34, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Much clearer, thank you! I'll remove the cleanup tag. --Fang Aili 17:57, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Non microsoft[edit]

Is Ecma used by anyone but microsoft? Mathiastck 02:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why this question ? As there is a list of standards referenced in this article you could wel have spotted that alot of the Ecma standards are not just software related (as in softwaredevelopement it would be very normal for the biggest software company in the world to be involved in a lot of standards) but also standardize al kinds of fysical media like CD's and DVD's. The ISO 9660 norm for CD-ROM is a wel known example of a standard that is also an Ecma standard. Ecma is mostly used for standardizing already developed technologies by ICT related industries and therefore Microsoft is a likely big contributor. hAl 11:31, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The ISO9660 is an ISO standard. The fact that ECMA copied it and slapped "Ecma" in front of it doesn't make it an Ecma standard. Likewise for the Eiffel language, which has been standardized before Ecma published its version. So the question holds: besides .NET and OOXML is there any other standard that is truly Ecmas? In the affirmative case, were these other standards submitted by a company other then Microsoft? Ecma has a controversial history of involvement with Microsoft in the XML Office file formats war, so information on this regard is welcome. [User:155.56.68.220|155.56.68.220]] 08:32, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

That is a weird reaction reaction showing both ignorance and an unwillingness to just just verify information in the publicly available ecma standards. Taken from the first page of Ecma-119: In October 1985 a number of industrial and software companies in the USA invited experts to participate in the development of a working paper for such a project. The result of this work, in which also expert members of ECMA/TC15 as well as from Japan participated, was a report dated May 1986 and known as the “High Sierra Group” proposal.

This proposal was submitted in Europe to ECMA for their consideration. ECMA TC15, in collaboration with experts from user organizations, invested a considerable amount of work into this proposal in order to clarify and complete its technical contents and to re-edit it in a form suitable for an Standard. Particular attention was given to conformance aspects by applying the same editing principles as for the other standards for labelling, such as ECMA-13 (ISO 1001) and ECMA-107 (ISO 9293). As a result Standard ECMA-119 was issued in December 1986.

This ECMA Standard was submitted by ECMA to ISO for processing as an International Standard under the ISO fast-track procedure, which resulted in International Standard ISO 9660 in which a number of improvements and editorial amendments were introduced. This 2nd Edition of Standard ECMA-119 is technically identical with ISO 9660.

As you can see the ISO 9660 standard is derived from an ecma standard submitted by industry and standardized in ecma TC15. This standard was submitted for fasttrack simular to the current ooxml standard. Improvements resulting form this fasttrack proces were added to the second edition of this Ecma standard. hAl 09:40, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should be updated[edit]

"Ecma expects to submit a proposed standard to the International Organization for Standardization for ISO approval, around December 2006.[9]"

Anyone know if it was submitted yet? 69.31.174.216 18:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Emca vs EMCA[edit]

Given that EMCA is an acronym, shouldn't it always be in ALL CAPS? Yoda of Borg (talk) 07:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheerleading[edit]

The 'aims' section reads a bit like marketing copy. For over 40 years it's done this, it's achieved over 2/3 success with that, it's published over 230 whatevers, it prides itself on blah blah blah. Anyone mind if I trim it and tone it down? Klassobanieras (talk) 21:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And "Unlike national standardization bodies, Ecma is a membership-based organization." Wouldn't it also be true to say "Like most standardization bodies, Ecma is a membership-based organization.", or even "Ecma is a membership-based organization." ? 150.101.166.15 (talk) 03:58, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

adding a criticisms section[edit]

probably starting with this reference.--Bodigami (talk) 06:43, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Giving away paper copies of 7 standards[edit]

I have paper copies of the following ECMA standards. They are 8 1/2 x 11 with blue covers. They all deal with character sets, which I was working on at the time. (See my contribution to the tilde article, which I'm very proud of.) The biggest is 24 pages. I want to get rid of them (they were very hard to get from ECMA in the 80s, which, from the little corner I saw, did not seem to be a well-run enterprise). Does anybody want them, or have a suggestion of any library/museum that I could send them to? It's all available online now, although these specific editions might not be, if anyone else is interested in character set history.

6, 5th edition, March 1985
43, 2nd edition, December 1985
113, 2nd edition, July 1988
114, June 1986
118, December 1986
121, July 1987
128, July 1988

(See List of Ecma standards for more details.)

I will pay for postage if destination is in U.S. deisenbe (talk) 18:23, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ecma International. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131014093844/http://ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-404.htm to http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-404.htm

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).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:54, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]