ISO/IEC 22989 is the AI concepts and terminology standard, and it is the normative reference for 23053. 23053 uses its terms and adds the ML system framework.
ISO/IEC 23053 clause 2 makes ISO/IEC 22989 the source of the terms it uses, and the reference is undated, so the current edition including amendments applies. 22989 defines the broader AI concepts and stakeholder roles. 23053 takes those terms and builds the ML-specific framework: the system components, the approaches and the pipeline. Both standards have a generative AI amendment in the same approval pipeline. A governance team that tracks 23053 without tracking 22989 is watching half of the pair, because a terminology change in 22989 reaches the description through the normative reference.
Which one defines generative AI?
Both projects touch it. 22989 Amendment 1 is the terminology amendment; 23053 Amendment 1 adds the ML framework entries. Read them as a pair.
Is the 22989 reference dated?
No. Clause 2 of 23053 leaves it undated, so the current edition including amendments applies.
Where this comes from
The clause record states each unit in our own words and cites the source. The amendment page separates the public draft summary from the published base edition. The base record is ISO standard 74438; the terminology amendment is ISO standard 88145.
Not legal advice; does not certify. The amendment wording is not held and is not stated.