<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)"><!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><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:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;
margin-left:36.0pt;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1263801033;
mso-list-template-ids:-1386858022;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:1674529735;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-1816467168 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l1:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l1:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l1:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l1:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l1:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l1:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l1:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l1:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
--></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-GB link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Rex<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Thanks for this clarification. There are no current Resolutions of SC 34 that would make it possible to initiate a CD ballot on revisions of Parts 1 and 4, so this will need to be agreed by SC 34, probably at the next Plenary. I’m not aware of there being any particular urgency for this. It can also be argued that there is little point in publishing CORs for Parts 1 and 4, if a revision is likely to be published within a year of publishing a COR.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Kind regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Francis<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US> Rex Jaeschke [mailto:rex@RexJaeschke.com] <br><b>Sent:</b> 24 November 2017 14:52<br><b>To:</b> SC 34 WG4 <e-SC34-WG4@ecma-international.org><br><b>Cc:</b> TC45 <e-TC45@ecma-international.org><br><b>Subject:</b> Editions of 29500-1 (Strict) and 29500-4 (Transitional) beyond 2016<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Murata-san sent the following to me privately. I’m replying to the whole group, so hopefully we can avoid further confusion on this topic:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Murata-san: I thought that we are going to create DCORs for 29500-1/4, finish the DCOR ballots, and then go for a DIS ballot after incorporating editorial changes. But I cannot find any records for our decisions for DCORs. Am I missing something?<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>We’ve discussed this several times; here’s my understanding.<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>From the minutes of the Barcelona, ES, meeting 2016-02<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='page-break-after:avoid'><b><u>The Next Editions of 29500-1/-4 beyond 20017<o:p></o:p></u></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>We froze the content of the 2015 editions about a year ago. Since then, any DRs closed that modify Parts 1 or 4 have been labelled “Closed in COR4”. Newly closed DRs will be labelled likewise. (As they all refer to clause and page numbering from the 2012 edition, these references will all have to be changed to the 2016 edition, once that becomes available.)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>We have <u>never</u> done a revision of Parts 1 and 4; we’ve simply produced one or more CORs and then rolled them into a consolidated reprint of the previous base standard to produce a new one. Going forward, we’ll probably want to go through the more formal revision process, at the very least so we can incorporate the fixes for those DRs that require lots of fiddly editing that are onerous to describe in a DR/COR. However, we can limit the revision to that and to the incorporation of DR resolutions, and we don’t have to start the formal revision process until we pretty much have a final WD.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>We can discuss this further in future F2F meetings.<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>The Barcelona meeting was before the 2016 issue was completed. For previous editions, we’d produced 1 or 2 CORs, which were balloted in SC 34 only. Then I applied those CORs to the base standard to produce what used to be known as “a consolidated reprint”. As this needed *<b>no</b>* further balloting, it was published directly, and the whole process was editorial. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>ISO ITTF changed the process starting with the 2016 edition. Once I applied the CORs to the base standard, ITTF told us we had to do a combined JTC 1 ballot, which meant JTC 1, ISO, and ISO members all got a vote, instead of just SC 34 members. This delayed the process, but no changes resulted from those ballots. We were told by ITTF that we’d have to do this with future editions.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>The consolidated reprint idea is no more. What we have now is always called a “revision”, a term we’ve long avoided using.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Going forward, our options are to produce zero or more CORs. When we are ready to produce a new edition, we’d apply those CORs (if any) to the base standards, as before, and the whole thing would go to a combined ballot. However, the new capability is that since the result is considered a revision, we can make changes to the spec *<b>outside</b>* of the COR process. We discussed this, and I created two new dispositions for DRs that resulted in change: COR4 (edits go into the next COR) and REV3 (edits go into the next revision, but not via a COR).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Candidates for REV3 are editorial changes, and certain (typically repetitive) technical changes for which we don’t want to write out every edit in the DR resolution. We first used this designation in Seoul.<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>From the minutes of the Seoul, KR, meeting 2016-09<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style='border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:1.0pt 4.0pt 1.0pt 4.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='page-break-after:avoid'><b>DR 15-0016 “DML: Remove drawingml namespace qualification from attributes in Part 1”<o:p></o:p></b></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>We agreed to close this, but rather than put it onto a COR, it can be put into the new edition along with editorial changes. Closed in REV3.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style='border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:1.0pt 4.0pt 1.0pt 4.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='page-break-after:avoid'><b>DR 15-0017 “DML: Remove redundant drawingml attributes from Part 4”<o:p></o:p></b></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>We agreed to close this, but rather than put it onto a COR, it can be put into the new edition along with editorial changes. Closed in REV3.<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>In Geneva, we assigned this designation to two more DRs we closed there.<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>From the minutes of the Geneva, CH, meeting 2017-11<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style='border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:1.0pt 4.0pt 1.0pt 4.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='page-break-after:avoid'><b>DR 16-0025 “Primer: Part 4 stuff”<o:p></o:p></b></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-top:6.0pt'><span lang=EN-US>We agreed with Rex’s proposed approach. Closed in REV3.<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style='border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:1.0pt 4.0pt 1.0pt 4.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='page-break-after:avoid'><b>DR 17-0010 “VML: Attribute examples”<o:p></o:p></b></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-top:6.0pt'><span lang=EN-US>Murata-san presented his plan for resolving this issue. First, he’ll add the following subclauses, which because they are the end of their parent clauses, will not adversely affect section numbering.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-top:6.0pt'><span lang=EN-US><img width=339 height=354 style='width:3.5312in;height:3.6875in' id="Picture_x0020_1" src="cid:image001.jpg@01D36545.46DF3B60" alt="cid:image002.jpg@01D36509.CBEACC70"></span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-top:6.0pt'><span lang=EN-US>Then he’ll move one copy of each attribute group to the corresponding new subclause, and he’ll delete all the duplicates <u>without change tracking</u>. He’ll add the necessary customized text to each affected element to point to its corresponding attribute group subclause.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-top:6.0pt'><span lang=EN-US>Closed in REV3.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='page-break-after:avoid'><b><u>29500-1 and 29500-4 WDs<o:p></o:p></u></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Soon, Rex will start work on 29500-1 WD1, which will incorporate the resolutions for all closed DRs impacting Part 1. He plans to track the changes. He expects to be able to deliver this by the 2018-03 F2F meeting.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Once Murata-san has implemented the resolution of DR 17-0010, he’ll hand back ownership of 29500-4 to Rex, who will then produce 29500-4 WD1, which will incorporate the resolutions for all closed DRs impacting Part 4. He plans to track the changes. He expects to be able to deliver this by the 2018-03 F2F meeting.<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>As I’ve reported several times, I’ve started work on WD1 for 29500-4, and my plan is to complete that prior to the Prague meeting. My private copy of that draft contains the DRs closed as COR4, (and will contain any designated REV3) and *<b>also</b>* numerous editorial changes to correct/improve the English, none of which came from a DR. I plan to do the same for a WG1 for 29500-1.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Eventually, we’ll have a final WD that will be balloted and will become a new edition. As to whether we publish any CORs along the way has not yet been decided, not does it need to be any time soon. If we decide to publish a COR for Part 1 and/or 4, we can do so at any time, but that takes time and effort, and doesn’t help us in WG4, as we’ll already have our own internal consolidated reprint via the WD. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>So here are the steps leading to the next revision of 29500-1/-4:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><ol style='margin-top:0cm' start=1 type=1><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3'><span lang=EN-US>If we think it necessary, we can produce one or more CORs, and ballot them in SC 34. (If we chose to *<b>not</b>* publish a CD, then all DRs marked COR4 will be treated as though they were marked REV3.)<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3'><span lang=EN-US>Eventually, we get permission from SC 34 to revise.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3'><span lang=EN-US>I produce a CD for each Part, that is the 2016 standard + any COR4 fixes + any REV3 fixes<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3'><span lang=EN-US>We have the (hopefully) Final CD ballot and then the combined (F)DIS ballot.<o:p></o:p></span></li></ol><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Recently, Murata-san questioned our having WDs without having asked for permission to do a revision. As a WG, we can have whatever WDs we want internally. It’s only when we want to have a CD that we need to have a revision project, and we don’t need a CD until we decide to start the clock ticking on the next edition, which will be called a revision.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>I hope this clarifies things,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Rex<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></body></html>