The future of "Transitional": Japanese concern

[MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)]

(Again, wearing my Japanese hat)

> Putting aside question how or whether "transitional" should be extended
> -- wouldn't it be possible to use MCE for your requirements?

It may be possible.  I certainly hope that MCE or other safe mechanisms 
(e.g, extLst and new OPC parts) are good enough.

No matter which mechanism is used, Japan thinks that it should be
*standardized* at SC34.

> Adding new feature to "transitional" will be precedent and it would be
> then hard to resist to additional feature requests. I'm not saying
> whether this is good or bad, but it will increase maintenance work as
> "transitional" and "strict" are going to be quite separate specs after
> amendment goes through balloting.

MS Office and OOXML come from Western culture.  Although we are 
aware that a lot of attempts has been made for I18N, some languages 
and cultures might not be well supported yet.  We request WG4 to 
seriously consider requirements from all languages and cultures and 
make a fair decision.

Cheers,
Makoto