What known issues are there in the text of ISO 6789:2017?
Applies to: ISO 6789-1:2017 and ISO 6789-2:2017 · Updated 2026-10-28
Technical review: Alston Hsiao (Chieh-Jen Hsiao), CTO, STAND
Our review of the original text identifies 5 issues in the 2017 edition: 2 confirmed errors, 2 suspected typographical errors, and 1 labeling inconsistency. None of these is an official ISO corrigendum. Our check of official sources on 2026-10-25 found no record of ISO having published a relevant corrigendum. The original entries, the issues they raise, and our contextual readings are distinguished below for use when reviewing calculations and procedures.
Five issues in the 2017 edition
“Confirmed error” means a numerical inconsistency or incorrect reference has been established. “Suspected typographical error” means the wording has been verified, but the proposed reading remains an interpretation of the context. “Labeling inconsistency” leaves the evaluation classification open to discussion. Verifying what the text says does not mean ISO has endorsed our reading.
| Location (part, clause, or table) | Original entry | Issue | Our reading | Classification |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Part 2, Table A.15 | W = 1,660 % | The value at 10 N·m conflicts with Table A.14, recalculation using Formula (10), and the sum for W′. | Use W = 1.160 %. Count the resolution term twice for the indicating tool, round w to 0.580 %, then multiply by k = 2; W′ = 0.654 + 1.160 + 0.10 = 1.914 %. | Confirmed error |
| Part 2, C.8 e) | C.5.4 | C.5 contains only C.5.1–C.5.3; the cited clause does not exist. | Consult C.5.2 for the mean values and C.7 for uncertainty. The latter is the suspected intended reference, not an official replacement. | Confirmed error |
| Part 1, 5.1.6 | D, E and F | These are not the fixed-adjustment classes associated with nominal capacity; the next sentence also lists D and F as adjustable. | Read this as Type II Classes B/E in context, while recording the original D/E/F entry. | Suspected typographical error |
| Part 1, 7.2 example | nominal value; A, D and G | The third entry assigns “nominal value” to Classes A, D and G. In the 2003 edition the same line names Classes B and E, and this example’s heading already excludes B/C/E/F, so the classes appear to have been changed in error. | Do not use this entry to apply fixed-adjustment nominal values to A/D/G. Nominal set values for B/E are already covered by the example in 7.3. | Suspected typographical error |
| Part 2, w_re in Table C.1 | Type A; rectangular distribution | In C.6, b_re is the difference between two readings. The conversion uses the half-width of a range and a rectangular distribution, yet is labeled Type A, unlike the other Type B entries using that approach. | Calculate using b_re × 0.5／√3 and retain the classification query; the label does not change the result. Table 3 is internally consistent and is not included in this finding. | Labeling inconsistency |
The entry 1,660 retains the original decimal comma; the calculation explanations use decimal points.
How to use this information
When a calculation or procedure reaches one of these entries, you can use our reading while recording the standard edition, clause or table, original entry, and adopted reading together. For numerical issues, also retain the recalculation. This is our review guidance to make the reasoning traceable; do not label it an official ISO corrigendum.
ISO is revising Part 1 and Part 2, currently at the committee draft stage as ISO/CD 6789-1.3 and ISO/CD 6789-2.3. Neither draft has been published as a standard yet. We will update this page and recheck each issue when the revised standards are published. Until then, distinguish the original text, our readings, and any future official documents.