From keld@dkuug.dk Thu Sep 24 19:58:18 1992 Received: by dkuug.dk (5.64+/8+bit/IDA-1.2.8) id AA28773; Thu, 24 Sep 92 19:58:18 +0200 Date: Thu, 24 Sep 92 19:58:18 +0200 From: Keld J|rn Simonsen Message-Id: <9209241758.AA28773@dkuug.dk> To: hlj@posix.com, ynk@ome.toshiba.co.jp Subject: Re: (SC22WG15.121) Re: Inquiry about POSIX.2b Ad Hoc in October Cc: dwc@eng.sun.com, isaak@decvax.dec.com, sc22wg15@dkuug.dk X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 > > On the other hand, in the RIN meeting agenda which Keld posted in another > > email, a session for POSIX.2b I18N is also planned as follows. > > > > ... > > > > I would like to know 1) detailed information (meeting agenda, (expected) > > attendees, and so forth) about the POSIX.2b Ad Hoc and 2) relationship > > between POSIX.2b Ad Hoc and RIN meetings. As you may know, Keld will not > > able to attend the POSIX.2b Ad Hoc due to conflict with another meeting > > (SC22/WG20 - I18N, in Canada). From a Japanese representative point of > > view, I fear that most part of the two meetings may overlap if we have no > > appropriate meeting objectives. The RIN agenda is pretty full, as you may have noticed. I put the .2b issues on the RIN agenda, as RIN is charged with the i18n issues of WG15. I really doubt if we can reach all of the issues on the RIN agenda in 1 1/2 day, so I hope some issues can be dealt with during other committee time, that may be IEEE .2b ad hoc, or during the WG15 meeting. > Yasushi, I did not know that I was expected to send out a special notice. > I did send out mail a few months ago reminding WG15 members of their > action item to inform me of who would be attending. > > Action 9205-34: Member bodies to advise project editor of > proposed attendance at the planned October IEEE 1003.2 meeting > in Utrecht. Meeting will be convened as a 9945-2 ad hoc on Oct > 22,23 1992 if there is enough member body interest. > > As you know, we have changed our meeting schedule to these 22-23 dates > to accommodate WG15 members. We also did so because Keld told us in > Hamilton that he "might" be able to attend part of our meeting if it > was held at the end of the week, which it will be. I have just recently got the WG20 agenda and meeting schedule, so I have not done my travelling schedule yet. I still plan to be available in Utrect the saturday and sunday, if the meeting is held. There are more Danish people wanting to attend, at least 1 person, Peter Cordsen has said he would like to, but I have no confirmation from him. > The agenda for the two days is: > > 1. Administrivia ... > > 2. Review proposals from Denmark and Japan for additions > to POSIX.2b, as listed in Annex H. [Note: None have been > received as of today.] > > 3. Review other POSIX.2b changes, including new pax format > and changes already made in response to Danish and Japanese > ballots. > > 4. Administrivia ... > > If we receive no such proposals and get no participation in Utrecht, we > will be disappointed. If proposals somehow arrive in Reading two days > later, they will not be able to be reviewed by the IEEE working group > for another three months and not be accompanied by any personal > interaction. Thus, I estimate that the POSIX.2b schedule will slip a > minimum of six months. We plan to have something emailed some time before Utrecht, that is about a week before. > Therefore, I hope we have adequate representation at the Utrecht > meeting from any WG15 members interested in keeping the POSIX.2b work > on the fast schedule requested by WG15 in Hamilton. How fast was the schedule for .2b ? I remember WG15 asking for a fast schedule of -2 - hoped to be in ballot this month and an IS around start of 1993. Keld