<div dir="ltr">I don't think that we need a new DR. We only have to reopen DR 09-0037 <div>and add a new solution. John, could you propose a solution?</div><div><br></div><div>FYI: Suzuki-san is aware of the issues, and is going to study them.</div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>Makoto</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2015-09-10 8:03 GMT+09:00 John Haug <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:johnhaug@exchange.microsoft.com" target="_blank">johnhaug@exchange.microsoft.com</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">After digging into this, it seems DR 09-0037 may have been resolved incorrectly – implementations do write out those attributes. The correct resolution seems
to be the other option from that old e-mail. Which would leave the attributes in CT_TextFont (technically, re-add them) and DR 09-0055 can be applied as we planned and approved. Shall I file a DR to change 09-0037, assuming we can incorporate that (and 09-0055)
into the pending COR3b?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">John<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> John Haug [mailto:<a href="mailto:johnhaug@exchange.microsoft.com" target="_blank">johnhaug@exchange.microsoft.com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, August 14, 2015 2:52 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'SC 34 WG4' <<a href="mailto:e-SC34-WG4@ecma-international.org" target="_blank">e-SC34-WG4@ecma-international.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> COR3 issue: ST_PitchFamily<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div><div><div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Background: E-mail “</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">A second COR for 29500-1 and the type ST_PitchFamily in DML<span style="color:#1f497d">”
forwarded below<u></u><u></u></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Background: E-mail “</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">ST_PitchFamily in dml-main.xsd<span style="color:#1f497d">” (latest
reply 2015-07-12)<u></u><u></u></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#2f5597"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#2f5597">Summary:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p><u></u><span style="font-family:Symbol;color:#2f5597"><span>·<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:#2f5597">DR 09-0055: CT_TextFont@pitchFamily changed to be of new type ST_PitchFamily (missing in DCOR)<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p><u></u><span style="font-family:Symbol;color:#2f5597"><span>·<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:#2f5597">DR 09-0037 already removed CT_TextFont@charset/panose/pitchFamily<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p><u></u><span style="font-family:Symbol;color:#2f5597"><span>·<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:#2f5597">--> Proposed: back out DR 09-0055, re-open it, look at it from scratch<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p><u></u><span style="font-family:Symbol;color:#2f5597"><span>·<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:#2f5597">** Why was 09-0037 resolved as it was? ("Reviewed Shawn’s email of 2010-03-18. We chose Choice 2, “Remove the attributes from the standard”." The e-mail is the same as in the DR log from 2009-06-17.)<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Rex> Yes it looks like we need to reconsider these, and as MM suggested in his mail, “Re: A second COR for 29500-1 and the type ST_PitchFamily in DML”, on 2015-07-30
<span style="color:#2f5597">[JH: Forwarded below]</span>, we NOT include this in the 2nd COR, but rather take our time and fix it next time around. I suggest making a new DR that points to these two.<span style="color:#2f5597"><u></u><u></u></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">I think these two DRs need to be looked at together to come to a final conclusion. Because there is such a significant amount of text changed here, I think publishing
as is would be a problem and that we should correct this before the Beijing meeting so the new DCOR ballot (COR3b?) will have it.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">
<a href="mailto:eb2mmrt@gmail.com" target="_blank">eb2mmrt@gmail.com</a> [<a href="mailto:eb2mmrt@gmail.com" target="_blank">mailto:eb2mmrt@gmail.com</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>MURATA Makoto<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, July 30, 2015 2:58 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Rex Jaeschke <<a href="mailto:rex@rexjaeschke.com" target="_blank">rex@rexjaeschke.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> John Haug <<a href="mailto:johnhaug@exchange.microsoft.com" target="_blank">johnhaug@exchange.microsoft.com</a>>; MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) <<a href="mailto:eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp" target="_blank">eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: A second COR for 29500-1 and the type ST_PitchFamily in DML<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Although I agree that we should revise <span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">CT_EmbeddedFontListEntry </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">and introduce a type (CT_EmbeddedTextFont) without the three </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">attributes, I do not think that this change is a must for this </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">consolidation. It is not very difficult to address this defect, but </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">if we start to incorporate not-so-difficult DRs as part of the </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">new COR for the remedy, we will run the risk of delaying <br>
it and the consolidated text for months.<br>
<br>
Regards,</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Makoto</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">2015-07-31 0:07 GMT+09:00 Rex Jaeschke <<a href="mailto:rex@rexjaeschke.com" target="_blank">rex@rexjaeschke.com</a>>:<u></u><u></u></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Yes, the changes proposed in DR 09-0037 went into COR2 and 29500:2012.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">John, if you agree that we have a conflict between 09-0037 and 09-0055, I’ll re-post this thread to
the committee and create a new DR for it. In that case, should we delay a new COR for resolution of this? After all, it is not related to the recent COR and consolidation.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Rex</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">
</span><a href="mailto:eb2mmrt@gmail.com" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">eb2mmrt@gmail.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> [mailto:</span><a href="mailto:eb2mmrt@gmail.com" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">eb2mmrt@gmail.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>MURATA Makoto<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, July 30, 2015 2:10 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Rex Jaeschke <</span><a href="mailto:rex@rexjaeschke.com" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">rex@rexjaeschke.com</span></a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: A second COR for 29500-1 and the type ST_PitchFamily in DML</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222;background:white">Ouch!</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222">I think that </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#222222"> DR 09-0037 should have
introduced a new complex type, </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#222222">say CT_EmbeddedTextFont, to dml-main.xsd. Its definition should be:</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#222222"> <xsd:complexType name="CT_EmbeddedTextFont"></span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#222222"> <xsd:attribute name="typeface" type="ST_TextTypeface" use="required"/></span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#222222"> </xsd:complexType></span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#222222">This complex type should be used only for 19.2.1.13 font (Embedded Font Name) .</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#222222"> <xsd:complexType name="CT_EmbeddedFontListEntry"></span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#222222"> <xsd:sequence></span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#222222"> <xsd:element name="font" type="a:CT_EmbeddedTextFont" minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="1"/></span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#222222">...</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#222222"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#222222">Then, no other elements will be affected by this change.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#222222"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#222222">Yes, we have to revise 19.2.1.13 font (Embedded Font Name) </span><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222"> significantly.<br>
Are the changes in DR 09-0037 incorporated now?</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#222222">Regards,</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#222222">Makoto </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">2015-07-30 5:23 GMT+09:00 Rex Jaeschke <<a href="mailto:rex@rexjaeschke.com" target="_blank">rex@rexjaeschke.com</a>>:<u></u><u></u></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">[I’m starting off with just the 3 of us. If/when we make progress, I’ll post to the whole of WG4.]<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">One of the issues Murata-san raised recently (See issue Category 2a from the teleconference minutes of 2015-07-28.) was the fact that the definition of the new type we added way
back, ST_PitchFamily, did not have a formal description in the Simple Types clause. This was supposedly resolved in DR 09-0055. When I first had a detailed look at that DR, I found that quite a lot of text that WG4 probably (I can’t be certain) agreed to,
didn’t make it into the COR and subsequent consolidated reprint.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Today, I started creating a new DR to fix any errors that occurred in processing DR 09-0055. Unfortunately, this looks like it has led to a larger problem.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">We adopted the resolution to DR 09-0055 at the Berlin Meeting on 2011-06-20/22.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">That resolution added the schema for the new type, ST_PitchFamily, and changed CT_TextFont to refer to that new type. This occurred for both Parts 1 and 4. However, the narrative
definition of the type was NOT added, even though it existed in the earlier part of the DR log. Clearly, that seems wrong; if we added the schema for a new simple type, we should have added the corresponding text to describe it.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Separately, 15 months earlier, at the Stockholm meeting on 2010-03-23/25, we closed out DR 09-0037, which involved REMOVING the following attributes from CT_TextFont: charset, panose
and pitchFamily. These removals are reflected in the resulting COR and the following consolidated reprint, 29500-2012. However, if the pitchFamily attribute no longer existed, it couldn’t be changed by DR 09-0055. But if we remove these changes from DR 09-0055,
the only changes left are to define the new type’s schema, but never to refer to it anywhere in the schema, which sounds very strange, indeed.
<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Looking at DR 09-0037 further, although we agreed to remove the 3 attributes, the resolution and resulting COR did NOT actually remove them from the schema definition for that type.
It seems to me that they should have. Also, a number of other types contain elements of type CT_TextFont, yet 09-0037 didn’t say to remove those 3 attributes from them (see §21.1.2.3.x for cs, ea, latin, sym, and buFont). Also, even after the attributes were
removed from the narrative in 19.2.1.13 font (Embedded Font Name), an example remains there that uses the attributes pitchFamily and charset, which were removed!<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Bottom line, in the unused proposal text of DR 09-0055, attribute pitchFamily was to be greatly simplified with a pointer made to the new type ST_PitchFamily. Yet, DR 05-0037 said
to remove this attribute altogether. All the other edits in the unused proposal of DR 09-0055 refer exactly to the descriptions of the same attribute (pitchFamily) in the cs, ea, latin, sym, and buFont elements mentioned earlier. So it seems that all the proposed
text (both used and unused) hits all the related places in the spec.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It is clear that the resolutions we can imply from what was recorded in DRs 09-0037 and 09-0055 can’t coexist, as they are contradictory. If we adopt the supposedly omitted text
from 09-0055, we contradict the intent of 09-0037.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Maybe the solution is simple: adopt option 1 from DR 09-0037 instead of Option 2, massaging it to accommodate DR 09-0055’s complete proposal.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#888888"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#888888">Rex</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#888888"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake<br>
<br>
Makoto<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br clear="all">
<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-- <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake<br>
<br>
Makoto<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div></div></div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><br>Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake<br><br>Makoto</div>
</div>