The future of "Transitional": Japanese concern

[Alex Brown]

Dear all,

I think this discussion just goes to demonstrate further that it is
difficult to discuss specific proposals without a strategic
understanding of the S/T issue. It is for this reason many of us have
been working hard producing a document on that question, and why it is
on the agenda for the Paris meeting.

If JP wants to table documents on the topic of typography then I am sure
NBs will study them with interest as their meetings schedules allow;
maybe by the time of the Stockholm meeting they will have had a chance
to form some firm opinions on them. Personally, I am in favour of
proposals which broaden the international dimension of standards.
However, I think it is illogical if JP has already concluded how this
issue relates to S/T, and making assumptions about the role of
transition *now* risks second-guessing the consensus-forming process
that is underway in WG 4 on the S/T question.

Once we have clear roadmaps for the S and T formats, then we will know
the most effective way to position Japan's (and other countries')
requirements in our future work plans.

- Alex.