**DRAFT** Report of a meeting of ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34/WG 1, 2010-12-09 ATTENDANCE ========== Alex BROWN (WG 1 Convenor) Griffin Brown Digital Publishing Ltd Lin CHENG (CN) RedFlag 2000 * Dennis HAMILTON (OASIS ODF TC) consultant Xia HOU (CN) BISTU Kaicheng HU (Ecma) Microsoft Rex JAESCHKE (Ecma) PKWare Ning LI (CN) BISTU Xin LIU (CN) CS2C Paul LORIMER (Ecma) Microsoft MURATA Makoto (JP) International Univeristy of Japan * Jim PETERSON (US) PKWare John PHILLIPS (GB) Microsoft Chris RAE (Ecma) Microsoft Andrew RIST (US) Oracle * Rob WEIR (US, OASIS ODF TC) IBM Changqiao WANG (CN) Beijing Founder Yao WANG (CN) Kingsoft Xinsong WU (CN) CESI Zhang ZHANXING (CN) CESI * participated remotely AGENDA AS ADOPTED (see SC 34 N 1511) ================= 1. Opening - 2010-12-09 09:00 CST 2. Roll call 3. Adoption of the agenda 4. Remarks from the convenor 5. Future meeting schedule 5.1 Approval of the report of the last teleconference 6. Review of outstanding action items 7. Parts of DSDL 8. Study Period on the "Zip" format (see SC 34 N 1494) 10. Any other business 11. Closing FUTURE MEETINGS =============== The next face-to-face meeting of WG 1 will take place in Prague, CZ, on 2011-03-31, the day preceding the SC 34 plenary (see SC 34 N 1558). ACTIONS ======= Outstanding action items now are: # MURATA Makoto, Mohamed ZERGAOUI and Jirka KOSEK to work on proposals for a revision of 19757-4 # Francis CAVE to contact the DAISY consortium wrt creation of a RNG schema # MURATA Makoto to prepare a working draft of an ISO/IEC 19757-2 v2 # Francis CAVE to produce a DCOR for 19757-8 in response to comments received, and forward it to the convenor for processing # Alex BROWN & Mohamed ZERGAOUI to submit draft documents outlining idea for a new Part 6 to the dsdl mailing lists # Rick JELLIFFE to prepare a proposed disposition of comments in response to the CD ballot on a revision of 19757-3:2006 (SC 34 N 1462) # All experts ro review Murata-san's schemas prepared for W3C (XML Security, XHTML, etc.) # Rob WEIR, Chris FRANCIS and Doug MAHUGH to draft some text for a NWIP to create a profile standard for Zip PARTS OF DSDL ============= A DCOR for 19757-7 was prepared in response to comments received from GB (see http://lists.dsdl.org/dsdl-discuss/2010-10/att-0002/batch.htm). STUDY PERIOD ON THE "ZIP" FORMAT ================================ Alex BROWN started by reminding attendees that a consensus had emerged in previous meetings that the best way forward was going to be to produce a NWIP proposing a "profile standard" for the Zip format. What would its scope be? Rob WEIR suggested that the scope was the portion of the Zip format which serviced the requirements of EPUB, OOXML, ODF and other widely used standards. Andrew RIST suggested that while this was true, working on specific ties between Zip and document formats, such as ODF and OOXML, and Zip was not in scope: the work should be on profiling existing Zip technology and identifying the portions of it available on a RF basis. Rob WEIR agreed, saying that in particular there were no dependencies between any activity standardizing Zip, and the ongoing work on ODF 1.2 in OASIS. A general discussion followed on the best way to create a "profile standard" within JTC 1. MURATA Makoto suggested, and it was generally agreed that, the best approach would be to develop a multi-part Standard with the first part containing the technical core, and referencing the PKWare appnote using the RER mechanism. This would allow the flexibility of adding new parts later to cover other topics. Andrew RIST suggested that trying to achieve anything initially beyond a technical core would over-complicate the project. Rob WEIR agreed though thought that in later projects there were some topics that may usefully be worked on - such as standardized mechanisms for addressing items within an archive. Alex BROWN suggested that such work may be complicated by mechanisms such as OOXML's for interleaving content within archives. Dennis Hamilton wondered how particular OOXML problems might be solved by work on Zip, as OOXML was not bound only to the Zip format. Chris RAE observed that although this my theoretically be true in reality OOXML appeared to have some dependencies on Zip itself. A general discussion followed on how we should be responding to SC 29/WG 11 on their requests for Zip enhancements, with the discussion taking the direction that future enhancements for Zip (referencing mechanisms, mirroring the central directory) might be usefully explored later, but are not a priority for the initial Standardization of Zip. Future work might also focus on such areas as metadata, encryption and signing. Ning LI asked whether encryption was an XML-level, or Zip-level consideration. A general discussion followed about different approaches to encryption in document formats. [The meeting closed at approx. 12:30 CST.]