The efficiency of standards work is currently the subject of intensive discussion in Europe. It must not be gauged merely according to the development time of standards. Such evaluation must also consider clearly defined quality criteria.

In November 1997, the Danish government called for the efficiency of European standardization to be improved in order to realize the Single Market. This prompted an intensive discussion about the principles of European standardization policy at all political levels.

KAN has declared its position on the central aspects of the discussion at European level of standardization policy and formulated ten principles from the point of view of occupational health and safety. The full text is enclosed as a leaflet inside this KANBRIEF.

Interview with Mr. C. Brekelmans, Deputy Head of Unit „Standardization”

In the wake of the discussion about increasing the efficiency of standardization, European and international standards organizations have developed new types of documents below the standards level (s. table p.11). These are designed to satisfy the changed requirements of the market and contain technical specifications only. They are intended above all for areas such as information technology which are noted for very short product cycles.

Workplaces in waste management, agriculture, forestry and horticulture where germ-containing materials such as compost, hay or sawdust are used expose workers to health risks. In particular, various fungi and bacteria in the air can cause an allergic lung disease known as extrinsic allergic alveolitis (EAA). This is officially recognized as occupational disease 4201 in Germany.

The World Wide Web (WWW) is the part of the Internet in which large amounts of information are made accessible to the public. It is, however, also being used increasingly for the exchange of documents among members of precisely defined target groups.

The correct translation of modal auxiliary verbs is just as important as it is difficult. May, can, should, shall or must something be done; how is „shall” translated and what is the difference between the English „must” and the German „muß”? Does the French „peut” mean „may” or„can” or both? Different translations may be possible depending on the nature of the text and context.

europa.eu.int/comm/sdt/en/ stygd/index.htm