Yes, I will (obviously) need to carve a large time slot in the plenary for
said process discussions!
----------------------------------------------
Harry Lewis
IBM Printing Systems
----------------------------------------------
ElliottBradshaw at oaktech.com
Sent by: owner-cr at pwg.org
03/13/2003 01:41 PM
To: Harry Lewis/Boulder/IBM at IBMUS
cc: "Hastings, Tom N" <hastings at cp10.es.xerox.com>,
pzehler at crt.xerox.com, cr at pwg.org
Subject: CR> PWG> PWG IEEE-ISTO number for Proposed
XHTML/Print standard
Harry,
Apropos of this, I wanted to let you know the latest ideas for Character
Repertoires.
As decided at Maui, we plan to create a standards track document that can
be referenced by the semantic model. This will describe a SM element that
is used to advertise the repertoires supported by a device.
We will, at some future point, want to assign a PWG number to this. I
will
do my best to follow the existing process, then cut over to the new one
when it is official. One problem is that we don't have a formal chartered
CR group. Since this standard may be our entire work, I don't know that
we
need to go through chartering.
Options are:
-do a CR charter
-create this document under some other group
-some sort of "individual submission" scheme
Should we discuss this at the plenary?
E.
------------------------------------------
Elliott Bradshaw
Director, Software Engineering
Oak Technology Imaging Group
781 638-7534
----- Forwarded by Elliott Bradshaw/oaktech/us on 03/13/2003 03:36 PM
-----
"Hastings, Tom N"
<hastings at cp10.es. To: "Lewis, Harry"
<harryl at us.ibm.com>
xerox.com> cc: pwg at pwg.org
Sent by: Subject: PWG> PWG
IEEE-ISTO number for Proposed
owner-pwg at pwg.org XHTML/Print standard
03/13/2003 03:22
PM
Harry,
Per the discussion today at the SM telecon on PWG process about standards
numbers and what to do about allocating a PWG number for the Proposed PWG
XHTML/Print standard as requested by Don for the W3C.
In order to give Don a PWG number for the XHTML/Print Proposed PWG
Standard,
the next series of numbers not yet used is 5102.n.
Currently, Proposed PWG standards have the following numbers:
5100.1, 5100.2, 5100.3, 5100.4 ... for IPP
5101.1 for the Media Standardized Names
So how about 5102.1 for XHTML/Print. If there are several documents,
5102.1
and 5102.2
ISSUE: How to number future standards? We can decide later how to
allocate
numbers for:
PWG Semantic Model
Print Services Interface
IPPFAX
PDF/is
etc.
Is the 5102 series for document formats, so that PDF/is would go in that
series?
Should IPPFAX go in its own series, or should it be in the IPP 5100.n
series?
Should PWG Semantic Model be in its own series?
Should PSI be in its own series?
Or is there some common theme that would help put some of these in the
same
series.
ISSUE: Separate isssue is what happens when the Proposed/Candidate
Standard
reaches Standard?
Does it get a new number or use the same number? If a new number could it
be some algorithm from its original number, such as adding 50. So 5150.2
would be the Standard version of Proposed standard 5100.2.
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.pwg.org/archives/cr/attachments/20030313/1d0ce8d1/attachment-0001.html