Planning for the Denmark meeting: the relationship between S and T

[MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)]

Dear colleagues,

UK proposed to give a presentation on the relationship between 
"strict" and "transitional" in the Denmark meeting.  This talk is
expected to summarize facts and options on this topic.  I welcome 
this proposal and I believe that this presentation (by Alex) should 
be on the agenda of our Denmark meeting.

Shawn proposed to demonstrate the support of 29500 in Microsoft Office, 
and then provide feedbacks from implementors about the relationship 
between "strict" and "transitional".  I again welcome this proposal 
and I am happy to put it in the agenda.

The DRs can be classified into two groups.  The DRs in the first 
group have nothing to do with the relationship between the two.  
Those in the second are quite affected by our decisions 
on the relationship.

In the sessions on the first day and the morning session on the second
day, I would like to concentrate on the first group of DRs.  The
afternoon session on the second day would be appropriate for the 
two presentations.  Finally, we can consider the second group.
This approach probably allows us to finish some more DRs and publish 
DCORs and FPDAMS in a timely manner, thus keeping the ball rolling.

We have discussed about conformance testing.  I believe that UK will
submit a new work item proposal about it before the Denmark meeting and 
a ballot will start immediately.  If this is the case, we cannot discuss
about conformance testing officially in Denmark.

Finally, scheduling the second sets of DCORs and AMs is certainly
important.  Given the number of recent DRs and our timely reaction, 
we should start to create the second sets in August.  But when should we
start ballots for the second sets?  Let me suggest January 2010.  
We can discuss about this topic in Denmark as well as in the next 
teleconf.

Regards,

SC34/WG4 Convenor
MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)