This paper is the first part of a summary report of a new commission of the Société Française des Sciences et Techniques Pharmaceutiques (SFSTP). The main objective of this commission was the harmonization of approaches for the validation of quantitative analytical procedures. Indeed, the principle of the validation of theses procedures is today widely spread in all the domains of activities where measurements are made. Nevertheless, this simple question of acceptability or not of an analytical procedure for a given application, remains incompletely determined in several cases despite the various regulations relating to the good practices (GLP, GMP, ...) and other documents of normative character (ISO, ICH, FDA, ...). There are many official documents describing the criteria of validation to be tested, but they do not propose any experimental protocol and limit themselves most often to the general concepts. For those reasons, two previous SFSTP commissions elaborated validation guides to concretely help the industrial scientists in charge of drug development to apply those regulatory recommendations. If these two first guides widely contributed to the use and progress of analytical validations, they present, nevertheless, weaknesses regarding the conclusions of the performed statistical tests and the decisions to be made with respect to the acceptance limits defined by the use of an analytical procedure. The present paper proposes to review even the bases of the analytical validation for developing harmonized approach, by distinguishing notably the diagnosis rules and the decision rules. This latter rule is based on the use of the accuracy profile, uses the notion of total error and allows to simplify the approach of the validation of an analytical procedure while checking the associated risk to its usage. Thanks to this novel validation approach, it is possible to unambiguously demonstrate the fitness for purpose of a new method as stated in all regulatory documents.