My action item: Letter to the W3C Web Applications WG

[MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)]

Folks,
Folks,

In the minutes of the last teleconf, there is one action item.

> Murata-san will study WC3’s document http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/ 
> and prepare a response. 


How do you feel about this draft?  I need some flowery words at the 
end of this mail, but I'm not a soliciast.  Help!

Cheers,
Makoto

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 candidate recommendation "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.

WG4 believes that widget pacakges and OPC packages are meant to meet
different reqruirements, and thus they cannot be unified in a hurry
without causing significant damage to both OOXML and widgets.
Requirements specific to OPC include file renaming and
fallback-guranteed extensibility through ISO/IEC 29500-3 (Markup
Compatibiity and Extensions).  Meanwhile, those specific to widge
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, some members of WG4 intend to join a public
mailing list for the discussion of a scheme for package URIs, namely 
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pkg-uri-scheme/>.

....Some flowery word here...

Regards,

SC34/WG4 Convenor
MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)