Editorial 

NIST-Coordinated Standard for 

Fingerprint Data Interchange 

In the May/June 1993 issue of the Journal of Forensic Identificatio

an editorial written by Mssrs. Watling and Evans was published entitl

“NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) Standards 

Livescan”. To a readership not familiar with the American Nation

Standards Institute (ANSI) standards process, the authors put for

several arguments in support of their opinions. Unfortunately, much 

the information contained in the editorial is erroneous. 

The proposed standard discussed in that editorial is ANSI/NIS

CSL 1-1993, entitled “Data Format for the Interchange of Fingerpr

Information”. It specifies and defines the content, format, and units 

measurement for the exchange of information that may be used in t

fingerprint identification of a subject. 

In their editorial, Mssrs. Watling and Evans imply that the propos

standard encourages “doing away with inked fingerprint cards”. This 

not true. The proposed standard provides a common method and fo

mat for exchanging electronic fingerprint images and other data b

tween dissimilar Automatic Fingerprint Identification Systems (AFI

or live-scan systems. Use of the standard will eliminate unnecessa

costs for developing several customized versions of the same softwa

required to enable separate organizations using dissimilar systems 

communicate with each other. It will be the local, state, or feder

agency that makes the decision to use and retain fingerprint cards or 

discard them in favor of the electronic images. 

Neither NIST nor the United States Government sets or establish

ANSI standards. As an accredited developer for ANSI standards, NIS

serves as editor and coordinator of this voluntary standard for t

interchange of fingerprint information. 

This standard is being developed as an ANSI standard. As such, th

procedures required by ANSI and adhered to by NIST provide that du

process, openness, and consensus be achieved and proved before an

J. Forensic Ident. 

344 /43 (4), 1993 
Editorial

NIST-Coordinated Standard for

Fingerprint Data Interchange

In the May/June 1993 issue of the Journal of Forensic Ide

an editorial written by Mssrs. Watling and Evans was publish

“NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) St

Livescan”. To a readership not familiar with the America

Standards Institute (ANSI) standards process, the authors 

several arguments in support of their opinions. Unfortunatel

the information contained in the editorial is erroneous.

The proposed standard discussed in that editorial is A

CSL 1-1993, entitled “Data Format for the Interchange of 

Information”. It specifies and defines the content, format, a

measurement for the exchange of information that may be 

fingerprint identification of a subject.

In their editorial, Mssrs. Watling and Evans imply that th

standard encourages “doing away with inked fingerprint card

not true. The proposed standard provides a common metho

mat for exchanging electronic fingerprint images and othe

tween dissimilar Automatic Fingerprint Identification Syste

or live-scan systems. Use of the standard will eliminate u

costs for developing several customized versions of the sam

required to enable separate organizations using dissimilar 

communicate with each other. It will be the local, state, 

agency that makes the decision to use and retain fingerprint 

discard them in favor of the electronic images.

Neither NIST nor the United States Government sets or 

ANSI standards. As an accredited developer for ANSI stand

serves as editor and coordinator of this voluntary standa

interchange of fingerprint information.

This standard is being developed as an ANSI standard. A

procedures required by ANSI and adhered to by NIST provid

process, openness, and consensus be achieved and proved b

J. Forensic Ident.

344 /43 (4), 1993
Each workshop had its own set of topics to be discussed and resol

tionsto be agreed upon. Itwasbelieved that the NIST location wou

attract the maximum number of interested attendees. Furthermore, r

locating the workshops to other parts of the country might have result

in fewer attendees at each meeting and fewer viewpoints consider

during the decision-making process. 

In addition to workshops sponsored by NIST, the International A

sociation for Identification’s annual educational conferences that we

held in Nashville, St. Louis, and Atlantic City scheduled several se

sions addressing aspects of image quality relating to the fingerprint da

exchange standard. These meetings provided an additional opportuni

for interested individuals to express their opinion. 

Although it was stated in the Watling/Evans editorial that a four

workshop was conducted, this statement is not correct. A conferen

was held on December 8, 1992, which was a Technical Review Confe

ence for the Wavelet Scalar Quantization (WSQ) Compression Alg

rithm. It should not have been confused with the three previo

workshops. While the proposed standard provides for optional use 

data compression techniques, the particular algorithm is not specifi

by the standard nor is its use mandated. The purpose of this conferen

was to explain to vendors the mathematical logic and details required 

implement the WSQ compression algorithm in their systems. At th

meeting there were no formal topics addressing image quality. 

In order to inform the identification community of the developme

of this standard, over 450 letters were sent to individuals and organiz

tions that had been identified as having a direct and material interest 

the development of a standard. Each letter contained an explanation 

the ANSI process and procedures, an invitation to participate in t

process, and a preprinted form to enroll as a voting canvassee in t

development of the standard. 

In addition to the individual letters, publications carried announc

ments for the development of this standard. Articles appeared in t

May 3, 1991 and May 31, 1991 issues of Standards Action announci

this standard and calling for canvassers for its development. A simi

article was published in the March/April 1992 issue of the Journal 

Forensic Identification. The April 13, 1992, edition of Computer Go

ernment News also carried an article on the standard’s developmen

The entire text of the December 30, 1991 version of the propos

J. Forensic Ident. 

346 /43 (4), 1993 
Each workshop had its own set of topics to be discussed a

tionsto be agreed upon. Itwasbelieved that the NIST locat

attract the maximum number of interested attendees. Furthe

locating the workshops to other parts of the country might ha

in fewer attendees at each meeting and fewer viewpoints 

during the decision-making process.

In addition to workshops sponsored by NIST, the Interna

sociation for Identification’s annual educational conferences 

held in Nashville, St. Louis, and Atlantic City scheduled s

sions addressing aspects of image quality relating to the finge

exchange standard. These meetings provided an additional o

for interested individuals to express their opinion.

Although it was stated in the Watling/Evans editorial th

workshop was conducted, this statement is not correct. A 

was held on December 8, 1992, which was a Technical Revie

ence for the Wavelet Scalar Quantization (WSQ) Compres

rithm. It should not have been confused with the three 

workshops. While the proposed standard provides for optio

data compression techniques, the particular algorithm is no

by the standard nor is its use mandated. The purpose of this 

was to explain to vendors the mathematical logic and details 

implement the WSQ compression algorithm in their system

meeting there were no formal topics addressing image qualit

In order to inform the identification community of the de

of this standard, over 450 letters were sent to individuals and 

tions that had been identified as having a direct and material 

the development of a standard. Each letter contained an exp

the ANSI process and procedures, an invitation to particip

process, and a preprinted form to enroll as a voting canva

development of the standard.

In addition to the individual letters, publications carried 

ments for the development of this standard. Articles appe

May 3, 1991 and May 31, 1991 issues of Standards Action a

this standard and calling for canvassers for its development

article was published in the March/April 1992 issue of the 

Forensic Identification. The April 13, 1992, edition of Comp

ernment News also carried an article on the standard’s dev

The entire text of the December 30, 1991 version of the 

J. Forensic Ident.

346 /43 (4), 1993
The fact that five drafts of the standard were circulated for comme

and that there were two opportunities for canvassers to object to t

standard contradicts the statement in the editorial that “the new sta

dard (was) unfairly pushed through NIST”. 

While it is very unlikely that any standard can fully meet all of t

desires of all of the participants, the standards process provides 

opportunity for the participants to develop a standard that at least mee

their minimum needs. To receive approval for a proposed standa

ANSI requires that a consensus be achieved. The canvass vote of 

canvassers with only two negative votes on the final version of t

proposed standard indicates that this consensus has been achieved. 

R. Michael McCabe 

NIST 

J. Forensic Ident. 

348 /43 (4), 1993