ST_PitchFamily in dml-main.xsd

[Rex Jaeschke]

After looking at COR2 and DR 09-0055, I conclude that none of the edits proposed in DR 09-0055 after the heading “2011-06-03 Chris Rae:” and before the heading “2011-06-20/22 Berlin Meeting:” were incorporated into COR2, so were not integrated into the resulting new standard edition. And this is what John has also deduced.

 

The only edits that went into COR2 were for the Part 1 and 4 schemas. Clearly, the type should have been there too, and probably all of the missing bits John and I have identified.

 

As this is unrelated to the current task---that of integrating COR3---I propose we deal with it via a new DR.

 

While it might seem opportune to “sneak it in here”, remember that this integration can only involve applying COR3 to the 2012 base; any other technical changes would require a ballot of some sort.

 

Rex

 

 

 

From: eb2mmrt at gmail.com [mailto:eb2mmrt at gmail.com] On Behalf Of MURATA Makoto
Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2015 2:23 AM
To: SC34
Subject: Re: ST_PitchFamily in dml-main.xsd

 

John finds that some changes in DR 09-0055 

are not incorporated.  This is a big surprise to 

me, but John appears to be correct.

 

First, I checked the schema branch for COR2 to Part 1.  

I added the simple type ST_PitchFamily to dml-main.xsd 

on 2011-02-17.  The commit was dedicated to DR 09-0055. 

No other commits appear to have touched this simple type.

 

I first thought that there must be another DR for 

Panose fonts.  Yes, we have DR 09-0061.  But 

its content does not touch the solution in DR 09-0055.

Then, I thought the AMD1 or AMD2 reverted the 

change.  No, they did not.  Rex, do you have any ideas?

Regards,

Makoto

 

2015-07-11 8:09 GMT+09:00 John Haug <johnhaug at exchange.microsoft.com <mailto:johnhaug at exchange.microsoft.com> >:

Yikes, what did you dig up…!  There’s a limit to what I can find on this.  It appears a DR may not have been handled correctly years ago.  See WG 4 N 0230 for the change-tracked Part 1 COR 2 final draft.  The only DRs I can find that touch this simple type (and that may not be complete) are 09-0037, 09-0055 and 09-0056.  56 defers to 55 (https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx/Public%20Documents/2009/DR-09-0055.docx?cid=C8BA0861DC5E4ADC).

 

09-0037 deletes in 19.2.1.13 font at charset, font at panose and font at pitchFamily; agreed in Stockholm in March 2010.  DR 09-0055 makes numerous changes; Chris’ changes of 2011-06-03 agreed in Berlin in June 2011.  Those changes in 09-0055 are not reflected in the draft in N 0230 or in Rex’s private COR drafts with DR traceback references.  I’m not sure what drove the changes in N 0230 – another DR I haven’t found or just an incorrect application of edits.

 

Here’s what I can piece together so far.

 

DR 09-0055 does… | N 0230 does…

19.2.1.13 font:

changes @pitchFamily | deletes @charset, @panose, @pitchFamily (references DR 09-0037 in Rex's private DR traceback doc)

20.1.10.87 ST_PitchFamily:

adds this new ST | does not exist

21.1.2.3.1 cs:

changes @pitchFamily | no changes

21.1.2.3.3 ea:

changes @pitchFamily | no changes

21.1.2.3.7 latin:

changes @pitchFamily (incl. removing a note) | adds the note (no DR referenced in Rex's doc)

21.1.2.3.10 sym:

changes @pitchFamily (incl. removing a note) | adds the note (no DR referenced in Rex's doc)

21.1.2.4.6 buFont:

changes @pitchFamily (incl. removing a note) | no changes (the note already exists)

 

Does anyone have any memory of this?

 

John

 

From: eb2mmrt at gmail.com <mailto:eb2mmrt at gmail.com>  [mailto:eb2mmrt at gmail.com <mailto:eb2mmrt at gmail.com> ] On Behalf Of MURATA Makoto
Sent: Saturday, July 4, 2015 1:55 AM
To: SC34
Subject: ST_PitchFamily in dml-main.xsd

 

Dear colleagues, 

 

I checked all simple types in Part 1 XSD schemas.  All simple types 

are documented in Part 1.  The only exception is ST_PitchFamily in 

dml-main.xsd.  This simple type was introduced as part of COR2.

 

Regards,

Makoto





 

-- 


Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake

Makoto

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.vse.cz/pipermail/sc34wg4/attachments/20150712/b0e5fab0/attachment.html>