From keld@dkuug.dk Mon Nov 25 16:49:20 1991
Received: by dkuug.dk (5.64+/8+bit/IDA-1.2.8)
	id AA29879; Mon, 25 Nov 91 16:49:20 +0100
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 91 16:49:20 +0100
From: Keld J|rn Simonsen <keld@dkuug.dk>
Message-Id: <9111251549.AA29879@dkuug.dk>
To: dominic%british-national-corpus.oxford.ac.uk@xopen.co.uk,
        sc22wg15rin@dkuug.dk
Subject: Re: (XoJIG 381) (i18n.129) SC22WG20 resolutins from Sunnyvale meeting
X-Charset: ASCII
X-Char-Esc: 29

> [Note: posted to sc22wg15rin, not to original list.]
> 
> RINners,
> 
> [From "(XoJIG 381) (i18n.129) SC22WG20 resolutins from Sunnyvale meeting"
> dated Nov 22]
> > 
> > 	Resolutions of SC22/WG20 (Internationalization)		SC22/WG20 N044
> > 		Sunnyvale, CA 11-14 November 1991
> > ...
> >
> > Resolution 11: Questionnaire
> > 
> > SC22/WG20 notes with approval the work of the WG15 I18N rapporteur
> > group to develop a questionnaire on internationalization and encourages
> > the group to distribute their questionnaire quickly so that SC22/WG20
> > can use the results of the questionnaire as one of the inputs for its
> > Requirements and Reference Model for Internationalization.  Also,
> > SC22/WG20 requests its technical experts comment on the questionnaire
> > by 1 March 1992.
> 
> 1.  Am I correct in thinking that WG20 is suggesting that WG15RIN
>     should distribute, and then presumably process the returns from,
>     the questionnaire.  The wording is not 100% clear, although I
>     think this interpretation is probably the correct one.

Yes, you are correct.

> 2.  If it is the case that WG20 has thrown the questionnaire back over
>     the wall to WG15RIN, does WG15RIN think it appropriate that it
>     should distribute the questionnaire?  I have to say that, given the
>     following, it seems to me that the subject matter of the
>     questionnaire is clearly within the scope of work of WG20:

Well, WG20 thought that it had a lot to do, and that WG15RIN was
already doing this, so we could cooperate. Yes, WG20 was very
interested in the outcome of the work.

> > Resolution 7: Subdivided Project
> > 
> > In response to requests from SC22 and SC22/WG15, SC22/WG20 proposes
> > that its current project be subdivided to address the following topics:
> > 
> > 	o A standard specification techniques for cultural elements
> > 	  relevant to the work of JTC1 (for example, locale and
> > 	  charmap formats)
> > 
> > 	o A standard collection of such cultural elements
> > 
> > 	o A standard registration method for cultural elements (either
> > 	  for additional cultures or for new cultural elements)
> > 
> > 	o An standard international ordering on character strings
> > 	  using the ISO 10646 repertoire
> > 
> > Resolution 8: Requirements and Framework
> > 
> > SC22/WG20 plans to produce a document that describes Requirements
> > and a Reference Model for Internationalization.
> > 
> > Resolution 9: New Projects
> > 
> > SC22/WG20 proposes new projects (NP) on the following topics:
> > 
> > 	o An Addendum to TR10176 on Guidelines for International-
> > 	  ization, Localization, and Character Handling (including
> > 	  ISO 10646)
> > 
> > 	o Short, mnemonic character names
> 
> Keld, now that I've got in with my speculation, what's the actual
> intention of resolution 11?  (Thanks for posting the resolutions so
> promptly, by the way.)

As stated above.

keld