The future of "Transitional": Japanese concern

[Innovimax SARL]

Again, I was answering to Murata san pointing to MS Office (which is
Microsoft implementation, mind you)
The second point is that I agree with considering adding what we can
in STRICT part
The third one is to find a document that exists (which we could agree
to call LEGACY Document) that is not handled correctly by
Transitionnal ; then we will have the ability to discuss whether or
not we also need to consider that point for Transitionnal

Again, that's a very open proposal in order to keep the spirits for
what many NBs changed their vote for OOXML

Mohamed


On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Shawn Villaron <shawnv at microsoft.com> wrote:
> While I do agree that it is up to implementers -- not just Microsoft, mind you -- to determine which conformance class to support ( based on business case, customer feedback, suitability of technology, enabling interop, etc. ), I do think it's important for the standards community to work with national bodies such as Japan to address short comings in the current version of the standard as it relates to their language and cultural requirements.  I'm not sure that we should exclude changes to Transitional as that seems rather arbitrary at this point, and puts national bodies like Japan in a tough spot.
>
> I'd like us to keep an open mind here and discuss Murata-san's proposal.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Innovimax SARL [mailto:innovimax at gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 7:56 AM
> To: MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)
> Cc: SC 34 WG4
> Subject: Re: The future of "Transitional": Japanese concern
>
> Murata San,
>
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 1:57 PM, MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) <eb2m-mrt at asahi-net.or.jp> wrote:
>> (Again, wearing my Japanese hat)
>> 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.
>
> Coming originally me too from a non Western culture, I'm sympathetic to your proposal and more than that :
> * I support and thinks that France should support this FOR STRICT
> * I propose that you talk to the implementers (which are not national
> bodies) for the rest of your point ; If Microsoft do not implement STRICT, it is Microsoft problem, not SC 34 (since we already heard this sentence very very often)
>
> Then can you point us to document that exists and contains such information and for which such information is not kept ?
>
> Regards,
>
> Mohamed
>
> --
> Innovimax SARL
> Consulting, Training & XML Development
> 9, impasse des Orteaux
> 75020 Paris
> Tel : +33 9 52 475787
> Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
> http://www.innovimax.fr
> RCS Paris 488.018.631
> SARL au capital de 10.000 €
>
>



-- 
Innovimax SARL
Consulting, Training & XML Development
9, impasse des Orteaux
75020 Paris
Tel : +33 9 52 475787
Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
http://www.innovimax.fr
RCS Paris 488.018.631
SARL au capital de 10.000 €