<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I’m confused. We spent months talking about versioning in the context of the namespace DR. So I’m confused when we say we’ve only talked about versioning for a few hours …<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I don’t believe my text closes the doors on improving versioning down the road. Rather, a few NBs have suggested we add a versioning attribute now. Unfortunately, they’ve provided no real use case nor have they provided any details about how a versioning attribute/technology would work. As you mention, versioning is hard. Very hard.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>So my original statement is that based on what we currently now, we don’t know of a reason why we need to changing our versioning strategy; furthermore, I acknowledge that more investigation is going on, and that that investigation might very well lead to additional versioning technology being added to ISO/IEC 29500. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Hence I don’t understand what we gain from a more weak statement. At the moment, we aren’t hiding something from the NBs … <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Innovimax SARL [mailto:innovimax@gmail.com] <br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, January 25, 2010 10:04 AM<br><b>To:</b> MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)<br><b>Cc:</b> Rex Jaeschke; SC 34 WG4<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: Proposed Response to FPDAM Part 1 BR-0001, et al<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I agree with Murata san here : versionning is a HARD topic, and we almost find no satisfying consensus<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>It still think that it is a mistake to keep it hard for implementers to make the difference between ECMA version and ISO version (and further with any subsequent version we will produce here at ISO), and I take every occasion to say it loud.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>So to say the least, I think that telling that "we are not sure" is a good trade off in order to be able to answer something constructive<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Mohamed<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 6:56 PM, MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) <<a href="mailto:eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp">eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>> I think Shawn had it just right. I agree with him that this is exactly the right time to<br>>make a strong/definitive statement. We have spent so much time on this<br>>issue and made no change whatsoever.<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal>I do not think that we have spent a lot of time on versioning. We spent<br>a few hours in Denmark, and that's all. A few hours are not at all good<br>enough for this difficult topic.<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><br>>I am not aware of any member<br>>feeling so much in doubt that they are actively working on proposals to<br>>identify unhandled cases that need new mechanisms.<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal>Had I not cared existing documents conformant to both the 1st edition<br>Ecma OOXML and ISO/IEC 29500:2007, I would have proposed a mechanism<br>for distinguishing the 1st edition OOXML and ISO/IEC 29500:2007.<br>Moreover, when the next version of Parts 1 and 4 introduce significantly<br>inconsistent changes, I may well propose a versioning attribute.<br><br>Cheers,<br><span style='color:#888888'>Makoto</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br clear=all><br>-- <br>Innovimax SARL<br>Consulting, Training & XML Development<br>9, impasse des Orteaux<br>75020 Paris<br>Tel : +33 9 52 475787<br>Fax : +33 1 4356 1746<br><a href="http://www.innovimax.fr">http://www.innovimax.fr</a><br>RCS Paris 488.018.631<br>SARL au capital de 10.000 €<o:p></o:p></p></div></div></body></html>