Well Al, I have to agree totally with Jeff (and you) it has proven an interesting discussion.  I laid back for quite some time before hopping in, but the bait was just too sweet in the end!

Jeff, having worked with Walt on the Internationization of a variety of documents over the past several years, I can tell you Walt has fought a vicious battle to ensure that all sides have a level playing field.  Of course this results from compromise on both sides and yes, I am fully aware there are some issues which will not be compromised.  In fact, it is one of those very issues that caused Walt to have ISO withdraw ISO-9606-1 and put it back in the hands of TAG's.  It is only issuance of that document which is seemingly holding progress, but it needs to be right.

As for the value of Internationalization, since I've worked extensively overseas in the past 20+ years, when a major company comes into a huge project and starts citing ASME or AWS Standards as the base design documents, they often don't realize locally avaiable materials do not fit ~ I would BET you've seen ASME become very open to the foriegn materials issues, as AWS D1.1 will also be considering (shockingly) and of course B2.1 has also adopted many foriegn materials.

FYI: ASME B31.3 has already become a "default" ISO Standard (See ISO 15649).

EDIT: Spelling.

No, our system isn't broken and doesn't necessarily need to be "fixed" but it does need to evolve in order to stay current with the world; which is what Detroit automakers failed to do and we all know where they stand....

Sorry Jeff … Limited cell service and NO internet out on the “Rez”

Now, let’s get back to beating that dead horse!

First, it’s USUALLY management that pisses me off … RARELY the welder(s)
Unless of course, they REFUSE to follow the written instructions.

Programmatically nice! – Just to be sure, I looked it up. (Lots of programming/computer references.)

pro•gram•mat•ic
–adjective
1. of, pertaining to, consisting of, or resembling program music.
2. of, having, advocating, resembling, or following a plan, policy, or program: programmatic art.

OK, the “sour note (1), plan interrupter, policy breaker or bad integer (2)” in this case is, the welder.

Right or wrong, company policy requires me to fill out an NCR.
Not much I can do about that.

Oh, you don’t like SOP?

How about natural order, logical progression, or possibly the one that YOU mentioned … CODE!
(Also not mentioned by the OP, which “should” be included in the pre-WPS.)

Now, WHO is reading into the post? 

Using D1.1 as one of the more easily navigable ones. (Yes, I know, NO “pre-WPS” there.)

Clauses 1 through 5 tell you why and how it’s done and Clause 6 – Inspection, tells me what I need to do.

Sounds like a Standard Operating Procedure to me! 

Now, enough with the silliness!

It seems many have an opinion so, I would like to ask YOU and the rest of the Forum a couple of questions that I believe is also pertinent to this topic.

   1) The welder, using the minimum/maximum values in the pre-WPS and is “stubbing out”, not getting fusion, and can barely keep the arc lit.
       (You verified it with a calibrated meter.)
What do you do?

    A) Stop the test after he made the tacks and turn in the still useable test items along with your report asking for an RFI, questioning the parameters you were   given?

    B) Let him fill the weld area with dingle berries and slag?

    2) What happens about half-way through as the welder is welding, a crack develops?
        Again, what would you to do? (I don’t think that crack repair would be in the procedure.)

The whole topic is a double edged sword …
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t and I, have been had both ways! 

“My wife thinks I'm just argumentative.”

Gee, you’re lucky … the guys on site seem to think that I’m an A$$-Hole! 

When I show-up on site everyone stops working … So I NEVER have to write an NCR on a welder!! 

Cheers,
jb