ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC34 N0xxx
ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC34/WG2 N227

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC34/WG2

Information Technology --
Document Description and Processing Languages
-- Information Presentation

TITLE: Report of adhoc meeting (editors discussion) in Oct. 13 and 14, Singapore
SOURCE: Keisuke Kamimura and Lim Soon-Bum
PROJECT: is24754
PROJECT EDITOR: Keisuke Kamimura and Lim Soon-Bum
STATUS: Document for SC34 meeting in Atlanta
ACTION: For information
DATE: 2005-11-12
DISTRIBUTION: SC34/WG2 and Liaisons
REFER TO:
REPLY TO: Dr. Yushi Komachi, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34/WG2 Convener
Telephone: +81 3 5434 7053
Facsimile: +81 3 5445 3663
Email: komachi@y-adagio.com
SC34/WG2 Web: http://www.y-adagio.com/public/sc34wg2/index.htm

Mr. G. Ken Holman, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34 Secretariat
Telephone: +1 613 489 0999
Facsimile: +1 613 489 0995
Email: jtc1sc34@scc.ca

Dr. James David Mason, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34 Chairman
Telephone: +1 865 574 6973
Facsimile: +1 865 574 1896
Email: masonjd@y12.doe.gov
Web: http://www.y12.doe.gov/sgml/sc34/


Report of adhoc meeting (editors discussion) in Oct. 13 and 14, Singapore

The editors of the project (is24754) held an ad hoc meeting for the project on 13 and 14 October 2005 in Singpore along with other invited experts and individuals on the occasion of the Asian IT Standardization Workshop hosted by the Center of the International Cooperation for Computerization (CICC), Japan.

At the ad hoc meeting, the editors explained the rationale and objectives as well as the goals of the project, and received comments from the audience. Some of the comments are quoted below.

Comment from the audience: Document rendering systems may implement a different style and layout standard, such as XSL, DSSSL, CSS. And each of these standards supports different functionalities, so it would be difficult to define a common set of features across implementations.

Response from the editors: The project does not aim to define the minimum set of functionalities that each document rendering system may implement. Rather, it aims to define a common framework against which you can compare the functionalities that a document rendering system may have.

Comment from the audience: The term 'minimum' still seems to be ambiguous.

Response from the editors: When you have to interchange a document between two different document rendering systems, you need to negotiate the common functionalities that are shared across the two systems. In other words, you have to find what the minimum functionalities are. This is what the term minimum stands for.

Comment from the audience: Although the project seems to address textual documents, it may need to extend to spreadsheet documents as well.

Response from the editors: We will take a note of it.

Comment from the editors: Even after negotiation, two rendering systems may not reach a minimum requirement. The project should take of such cases as well.