My action item: Letter to the W3C Web Applications WG

[MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)]

Dear colleagues,

Regarding our letter to the W3C Web Applications WG, here is a rewrite
of the last para.

  WG4 understands that the widget package uses the latest version
  (6.3.2) of the ZIP specification, which allows UTF-8.  Meanwhile,
  ISO/IEC 29500-2 uses an earlier version (6.2.0) and relies on 
  the %HH convention, since 6.2.0 was the current version when 
  Ecma TC45 started the first edition of OOXML.

I plan to send the letter after our next teleconf.

Regards,

SC34/WG4 Convenor
MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)
> 
> Dear the W3C Web Applications WG, 
> 
> I am writing on behalf of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34/WG4, which is responsible 
> for the maintenance of ISO/IEC 29500 (OOXML).
> 
> WG4 reviewed the working draft "Widgets 1.0: Packaging and
> Configuration" with interest.  It provides a package format similar to
> the OPC(Open Packaging Conventions), which is specified in ISO/IEC
> 29500-2.  The text of the OPC specification is available as
> ECMA 376 Part 2 (Second Edition)
> <http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-376.htm>
> and from the public ISO Website 
> <http://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/index.html>.
> 
> WG4 believes that widget packages and OPC packages are meant to meet
> different requirements, and thus they cannot be unified in a hurry
> without causing significant damage to OOXML, widgets, or both.
> Requirements specific to OPC include file renaming and
> fallback-guaranteed extensibility through ISO/IEC 29500-3 (Markup
> Compatibility and Extensions).  Meanwhile, those specific to widget
> packages include start files, icon files, localization, and
> preferences among others.
> 
> Nevertheless, WG4 believes that there are quite a few similarities
> between widget packages and OPC packages, and that information
> exchange between the W3C Web Applications WG and WG4 would be very
> fruitful.  Specifically, WG4 is interested in URI schemes, media
> types, and UTF-8 part names.
> 
> WG4 understands that the widget package uses the latest version
> (6.3.2) of the ZIP specification, which allows UTF-8.  Meanwhile,
> ISO/IEC 29500-2 uses an earlier version (6.2.0) and relies on 
> the %HH convention.  This is because ...
> 
> JTC1/SC34/WG4 looks forward to your views on this matter.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> SC34/WG4 Convenor
> MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)