Fish face. Not the same thing.
Not under the published scope for BS 8644, but the proposal that I saw was that BS 8644 be split into parts, with BS8644-2 having roughly the same scope as PAS 911. Not sure whether BSI has accepted the business case for this, though.
PAS 911 did need to go, because it appeared to contain a load of aspirational guidance that was the grand concept of how one entity (Kingfell - the sponsors of the PAS) thought things ought to work. That is one of the potential weaknesses of the PAS system (I'm not knocking PAS 79 by making that statement, by the way). I know of no-one who seriously tried to comply with it, in its entirety.
If they do produce the standard, then one thing it ought to tackle is the issue of what a Fire Strategy for a building in steady-state is intended to cover (rather than fire strategies produced in support of design work). We get asked to quote for these fairly regularly, but on questioning it's usual that the enquirer knows that they want one (or sometimes has been told that they need one), but often aren't sure why, nor what it should contain or what they're going to use it for. When we try and establish precisely what they're after, they normally flounder and we never hear from them again.
