<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 15 (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;}
/* 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'>Let’s discuss this on the next teleconference.<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'>Rex<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'><o:p> </o:p></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'> eb2mmrt@gmail.com [mailto:eb2mmrt@gmail.com] <b>On Behalf Of </b>MURATA Makoto<br><b>Sent:</b> Saturday, April 16, 2016 7:13 AM<br><b>To:</b> SC 34 WG4 <e-SC34-WG4@ecma-international.org><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: PLEASE PROOF: Drafts of 29500-1/-4:2016; feedback due by the end of 2016-04-29<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>I reported discrepancies between figures in the PDF version of the<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>consolidated Part 1 and those in the Word version. Most of them are<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>not real, but are caused by a non-acrobat PDF reader and my XSLT<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>script that extracts figures and tables.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>However, two of them are real. The figures in 17.4.22 17.4.24 of the<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>PDF version and those in the word version do look different. I guess<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>that this difference is caused by a bug of MS Word. We can address<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>this issue by creating small images for the example tables, but<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>I am wondering if we can do so as part of this consolidation.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Regards,<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Makoto<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>2016-04-13 2:24 GMT+09:00 Rex Jaeschke <<a href="mailto:rex@rexjaeschke.com" target="_blank">rex@rexjaeschke.com</a>>:<o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>I also don’t see any differences between the two versions, and agree with Caroline that the second one runs off the right margin. I'm running MS Word 2103 and Adobe Acrobat X 10.1.16.13.<br><br>Rex<br><br><br>-----Original Message-----<br>From: caroline arms [mailto:<a href="mailto:caroline.arms@gmail.com">caroline.arms@gmail.com</a>]<br>Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 7:15 AM<br>To: MURATA Makoto <<a href="mailto:eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp">eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp</a>><br>Cc: SC 34 WG4 <<a href="mailto:e-SC34-WG4@ecma-international.org">e-SC34-WG4@ecma-international.org</a>><br>Subject: Re: PLEASE PROOF: Drafts of 29500-1/-4:2016; feedback due by the end of 2016-04-29<o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Murata-san.<br><br>FWIW, for me, the diagrams in 17.4.10 and 17.4.11 look the same in both versions of the Part 1 draft. But the 17.4.11 diagram runs over the right margin in both.<br><br>I'm on a Mac, running Word for Mac 2011 and Adobe Reader 9.5.5<br><br>I'll check the other problems you found.<br><br> Caroline<br><br>On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 11:50 PM, MURATA Makoto <<a href="mailto:eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp">eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp</a>> wrote:<br>> The diagram in 17.4.10 in the Word version and that in the PDF version<br>> look different. The same discrepancy appear in 17.4.11.<br>><br>> Regards,<br>> Makoto<br>><br>> 2016-04-12 6:59 GMT+09:00 caroline arms <<a href="mailto:caroline.arms@gmail.com">caroline.arms@gmail.com</a>>:<br>>><br>>> Rex,<br>>><br>>> Carrying on through Cor 1.<br>>><br>>> Items 22-24 look OK<br>>><br>>> Item 25 looks OK wrt Cor 1, but I'm suspicious there might be another<br>>> problem. Should "not to use the fidelity" be "not to lose the<br>>> fidelity"? If that is not what is meant, some clarification is<br>>> probably in order. The current wording is confusing.<br>>><br>>> Items 26-34 look OK.<br>>><br>>> Item 35. Mostly OK, but missing an added space in ancestorstructured<br>>> in xPath row in attributes table<br>>><br>>> Items 36-39 look OK<br>>><br>>> Item 40 looks OK, but I suspect a typo that was not noticed before.<br>>> I think "default gallery hall" should be "default gallery shall".<br>>><br>>><br>>> Time for dinner.<br>>><br>>> Caroline<br>>><br>>> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 11:26 AM, caroline arms<br>>> <<a href="mailto:caroline.arms@gmail.com">caroline.arms@gmail.com</a>><br>>> wrote:<br>>> > Rex,<br>>> ><br>>> > Moving on to checking Part 1 draft against Cor 1 (Cor 3 in the DR Log).<br>>> ><br>>> > Items 1-4 look OK.<br>>> ><br>>> > Item 5 looks OK, but I think the inserted text could do with a link<br>>> > to<br>>> > 18.2.10 for extLst<br>>> ><br>>> > Items 6-13 look OK.<br>>> ><br>>> > Item 14. One insertion was missed, the comma after i.e.<br>>> ><br>>> > Items 15-16 look OK<br>>> ><br>>> > Item 17 looks OK, except:<br>>> > missed substitution of "1" for "on" in beforeAutospacing example<br>>> ><br>>> > Items 18-20 look OK<br>>> ><br>>> > Item 21 seems to have two problems<br>>> > 1. The cstheme row in table on page 303 has some extra periods<br>>> > compared to Cor 1.<br>>> ><br>>> > 2. This is not a problem with copying from Cor 1 to Part 1, but<br>>> > applies to Cor 1 as well. Unless I'm going blind (or am just<br>>> > confused by Arabic scripts/fonts, which other readers may be), I am<br>>> > seeing two instances of the same example markup that are explained<br>>> > to have DIFFERENT results.<br>>> ><br>>> > The first instance is the first example in the subclause 17.3.2.26<br>>> > <w:r> <w:rPr> <w:rFonts w:ascii="Courier New" w:cs="Times New<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal>>> > Roman" /> </w:rPr> <w:t>English ??????? </w:t> </w:r><br>>> ><br>>> > followed by:<br>>> > In this run, both English and ??????? should be in ASCII font<br>>> > slot, according to the two-step algorithm<br>>> > below. Therefore, both of them should be in the Courier New font face.<br>>> ><br>>> > The second instance is immediately before the attributes table<br>>> > <w:r><br>>> > <w:rPr><br>>> > <w:rFonts w:ascii="Courier New" w:cs="Times New Roman" /><br>>> > </w:rPr><br>>> > <w:t>English ??????? </w:t><o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>>> > </w:r><br>>> ><br>>> > followed by:<br>>> > This text run must therefore use the Courier New font for all<br>>> > characters in the range U+0000 to U+007F, and<br>>> > must use the Times New Roman font for all characters in the Complex<br>>> > Script range.<br>>> ><br>>> > I have managed to download DR 9-0040, but do not have time now to<br>>> > follow it through to see if I can figure out when/why the duplication<br>>> > appeared or which might be correct.<br>>> ><br>>> > I'll try and get to some more of Cor 1 later today or tomorrow.<br>>> ><br>>> > Caroline<br>>> ><br>>> ><br>>> ><br>>> > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Rex Jaeschke <<a href="mailto:rex@rexjaeschke.com">rex@rexjaeschke.com</a>><br>>> > wrote:<br>>> >> I just posted the following new documents to the WG4 website:<br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >> N 0333: 29500-1:2016 in DOCX and PDF, schemas and other<br>>> >> electronic<br>>> >> annexes [61MB]<br>>> >><br>>> >> N 0334: 29500-4:2016 in DOCX and PDF, schemas [12MB]<br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >> These documents are 29500-1/-4:2012 with CORs 1 and 2 applied.<br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >> Please post any corrections/suggestions to this list.<br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >> About a year ago, we tried to publish 29500-1/-4:2015 after having<br>>> >> incorporated COR1, but as we found errors, we produced a COR2. I built<br>>> >> on<br>>> >> last year s work by simply applying COR2 to what we already had. That<br>>> >> made<br>>> >> some new changes and undid a few from COR1.<br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >> For your convenience, CORs 1 and 2 are attached.<br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >> I have applied all the editorial corrections reported (especially those<br>>> >> documented in the Beijing meeting minutes from 2015).<br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >> I updated the Part 4 pointers into Part 1 to reflect clause-number<br>>> >> changes.<br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >> I ve asked Murata-san to get me the latest schemas, but as nothing was<br>>> >> changed in that regard for COR2, what I posted today should be the<br>>> >> final<br>>> >> schemas.<br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >> The review period ends on 2016-04-29. Hopefully, we can move these<br>>> >> drafts to<br>>> >> DIS ballots during the 2016-05-10 teleconference. We already got SC<br>>> >> 34 s<br>>> >> approval to do this at the Beijing Plenary. All being well, the ISO and<br>>> >> Ecma<br>>> >> editions will be published before year s end.<br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >> Rex<br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>> --<br>><br>> Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake<br>><br>> Makoto<br><br><br><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></blockquote></div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br clear=all><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal>-- <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><br>Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake<br><br>Makoto<o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></body></html>