A request for a new agenda item for the Prague meeting of WG4

[Rex Jaeschke]

I will raise this at tomorrow's WG4 teleconference.

In Beijing, WG4 discussed the ZIP study period activity. Our minutes from
that meeting read

x.ZIP Study Period Status

ZIP study group (SG) in WG1: There has been a lively discussion on the email
list (http://mailman.vse.cz/pipermail/sc34wg1study/) and Wiki
(http://xmlopen.org/wg1-wiki/index.php/Zip_Study). The SG recently had its
2nd teleconference. 
Alex presented a slide show (see N 0166).

The lightest-weight solution is to create a Referencing Explanatory Report
(RER) for standards using ZIP. The idea of creating a ZIP Profile standard
that uses an RER is currently the favored approach.WG1 will meet later this
week (Thursday) at which time it will discuss this topic further. All
interested parties are invited to participate in the meetings, on the email
list (http://mailman.vse.cz/pipermail/sc34wg1study/), and Wiki
(http://xmlopen.org/wg1-wiki/index.php/Zip_Study).


The day after the WG4 meeting ended, WG1 met. Since then Alex has submitted
2 documents, his study report and a NWI for a standard containing an RER to
PKWare's Appnote.

WG4 has NOT discussed this topic since, yet one presumes that the reason for
creating this new standard is to somehow help 29500. If that is the case,
then I think WG4 should state it's position: agree, disagree, or don't care.
If WG4 wants to make any sort of liaison statement about its thinking, it
can do so at the WG1 meeting that follows it in Prague and/or at the SC 34
Plenary. Note, that I am NOT advocating what WG4's position should/might be;
I just think we need to discuss this topic before the plenary.

Regards,

Rex (wearing his 29500 Project Editor hat)