ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 N957D Title: Disposition of comments on CD of 15897 (draft) Date: 2002-06-08 Source: ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 Status: editors draft References: SC22 N3266, SC22 N3341 In the following the dispostion of comments is given with respect to the CD ballot in SC22 N3341, Information technology - Procedures for the Registration of Cultural Elements. Disposition of comments: Netherlands 1. (dont know. I can see that there needs to be some control, but I also think it is important to have a timely procedure. Would the RAC be a more timely way of doing QA?) Norway 1. Maybe 60 days? USA 1. Not accepted. 14652 was approved by JTC 1. 2. Accepted 3. For 14652 see 1. Sponsor Autorities will be clarified 4. Not accepted. It is a valuable information to the reader that the info is available at a specific URL. The text will be changed to reflect that with some software eg complying to POSIX, you can automatically apply them. 5. The preparation and maintenance of narrative specs and repertoiremaps are defined in this standard. 6. accepted 7. the standard ISO wording will be used. 8. accepted 9. the narrative spec only addresses items relevant for computer use. will be clarified. 10. The proposed RAC will remedy this problem. 11. accepted. a definition of token identifier will be added. 12. There will always be errors. The RA should probably send an application back if it sees errors, and the SA would then have a chance to correct and then resubmit. The RA should then register, and probably come forward with comments. Tha RAC could also make comments. 13. see 11 14. probably the SA, RA and the RAC could submit comments. 15. accepted 16. accepted in principle. They should send an application via a SA. 17. Why cannot both have an obligation to check? 18. russian is an official ISO language. 19. repertoiremaps are defined in clause 6 20. accepted, for 14652 see 1. 21. the RA has a responsibility to be able to print the registry. thus all data must fit on a paper size that the RA can handle. The RA will deliver such prints on A4, which is the common papersize for such things. 22. probably accept. 23. not accepted. It is commonly acccepted good procedures for registries not to delete entries, or possiblities for entries. The proposal here would invalidate already existing entries in the registry. 24. not accepted. This is aligned with other specs in the field. 25. accepted 26. There is a reason, namely that you then can reuse a lot of data, eg for charmaps. 27. In these clauses you can add more information 28-38. These comments will be related to the danish member body, some comments: 28. Yes these documents are still relevant 29. It is relevant to the software engineer that here is a problem and that more information is needed . The SW eng is warned that english transliteration is not useful. A narrative spec can contain different levels of information and all is probably useful. A litte info is probably beeter than none. 30. It is not part of danish, but part of the foreign letters that Danish has rules for. 31. should be clarified to the latter. 32. The Ø problem is still there, unfortunately. Yes, more information could be added for eg han, and as disks are even more patient than paper, it should be possible to have space for elaborate specifications. 33. This gives guidelines for how to handle names, eg string space to set aside for names, and is also a way to document requirements that later can be codified. 34. Software engineers are probably expected to know english. inflection is specifically a problem, for translated texts, and eg gettext has specific support for some of this (singular/plural/more) grammar is getting supported now in many office systems. 35. It is used in apps, and 14652 supports it and MS also (AFAIK) 36. CEPT may be spelled out 37. These codes are cultural habits, and something SW eng would like to know. 38. see response 23. 39. The reorder-after is not normative in 14651. Well, maybe remove it from 14651. 40. I cannot see where the faults are (this may be my fault). 41. See 39. 42. accepted 43. accepted 44. This was a wish from the authors in CEN. 45. accepted 46. input means "keyed in" or "entered" 47. accepted 48. Japan, Canada, The Netherlands, UK, China has also been working on national POSIX profiles. 49. There are already many quite elaborate transliteration specs in 14652 style. 50. see 33. 51. The information can be used to set TZ, and in the case of more than one, it can be used to select the correct one. 52. See 35 and 23 53. see 37 and 23 54. see 23 55. see 18 56. see 1