From isaak@csac.zko.dec.com Fri Jun 25 12:24:21 1993
Received: from crl.dec.com by dkuug.dk with SMTP id AA03208
  (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4j for <sc22wg15@dkuug.dk>); Fri, 25 Jun 1993 22:22:27 +0200
Received: by crl.dec.com; id AA14923; Fri, 25 Jun 93 16:22:43 -0400
Received: by csac.zko.dec.com (5.65/fma-100391/BobG-15-Feb-93);id AA28693; Fri, 25 Jun 1993 16:24:21 -0400
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1993 16:24:21 -0400
From: isaak@csac.zko.dec.com (Jim Isaak-respond via isaak@decvax.dec.com)
Message-Id: <9306252024.AA28693@csac.zko.dec.com>
To: sc22wg15@dkuug.dk
Subject: updated summary of 9945-2 ballot (Austrian comment identified)
Cc: dwc@eng.sun.com
X-Charset: ASCII
X-Char-Esc: 29


Comments on DIS 9945-2	June 25, 1993 ref to: SC22 N1393
[More definitive summary of Japan ballot, and seperation of
 Austrian comment from Austrailian comments]

Voting Summary:
	21 Affirmitive; comments from:
		Austrailia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, Netherlands
	 1 Negitive; Japan
	 2 Abstentions

Comment Summary (condensed from N1393 text)

Austailia: 2 pages, 5 areas of comment
	UPE component not as rigorous, nor as well integrated into main doc.

	Historical Anachronisms maybe poor: eg. ls -1 & 512 byte units
		as opposed to -k

	Some utilities are overly specified & w/poor precision (eg. mailx)

	Review of document for consistency of approach & rigour of value

Austria:
	Timer resolution of 1 second seems too low


Canada: (one comment, one page)
	table 217, pg 116 for Utility Limit Minimum Value suggests an
	LC_Collate "# of weights" value of 2; no known languages work
	with this small of value (7 is required for Canada).

Denmark: (5 comments, 5 pages)
	1 - Localedef "copy"
	2 - Layout [18 point type for Section start]
	3 - correct/replace Danish locale
	4 - replace-after notion
	5 - symbolic elipses

Japan: (46 specific comments, 31 pages)
	These can be categorized into the following groups:
	- Copyright issue
	- UPE option
	- POSIX Locale
	- "Word" handling in ex and vi
	- Byte, Character and Column position issues
	- others

Netherlands: (11 comments (or so); 2 pages)
	Definition concerns; accept definitions from SC2:
	  Character
	  Coded Character Set
	  Graphic Character Set
	  Graphic Symbol

        replace GLYPH with graphic symbol

	affects:
	  2.2.2.29 "character"
	  2.2.2.27 "byte"

	concerned about <character-names> terms, move to seperate section

	pg 43: stateful codings are obsolete

	pg 44: meaning of "glyph", not in SC2 nor defined in 9945-2