An Ecma TC46 (OpenXPS) liaison request to add an agenda item to the WG4 meeting in Brazil

[MURATA Makoto]

Rex,

SC34/WG4 welcomes this request from Ecma TC46.  A defect report,
namely DR 09-0168 — OPC: No mechanism to distinguish ECMA-376:2006
from IS 29500, was raised in 2009, but WG4 has deferred this DR to
a future version of OPC.  Revising OPC is already in the agenda of
the Brazil meeting and this DR will be considered as part of that discussion.

Regards,
Makoto


2012/6/21 Rex Jaeschke <rex at rexjaeschke.com>:
> As I reported in the past year, Ecma TC46 has been considering updating its
> OpenXPS standard to point to the soon-to-be-approved 2012 edition of OPC and
> MCE rather than the original Ecma versions. However, I have since discovered
> that TC46 has an outstanding action item that impacts such a move.
>
>
>
> “IS 29500 Part 2 (OPC) removed element contentType element from the Core
> Properties Part schema, but did not change the namespace for that schema. As
> a result, there is no way to distinguish between ECMA-376:2006 and IS 29500
> w.r.t Part 2.
>
>
>
> The status of IS 29500, especially w.r.t changes in the schema namespaces to
> indicate breaking changes (possibly as a result of the Defect Report filed
> by CH) should be monitored, so the XPS spec can be changed to point to IS
> 29500 at some future point.”
>
>
>
> I started a private discussion on this with John Haug, who then posted to
> WG4 on 2012-05-21, “FW: Possible problem with TC46 revising its XPS spec to
> track 29500:2011 (or 29500:2012, for that matter)”. Jesper then posted a
> reply.
>
>
>
> As the liaison from Ecma TC46, I’d like us to discuss this situation in
> Brazil, especially as we look at revising MCE and OPC. How do we indicate a
> change in functionality to these Parts?
>
>
>
> Rex
>
>



-- 

Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake

Makoto