Letter to the W3C Web Applications WG from ISO JTC1/SC 34/WG4

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Letter to the W3C Web Applications WG from ISO JTC1/SC 34/WG4

Innovimax SARL
Dear the W3C Web Applications WG,

I am writing on behalf of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34/WG4, which is responsible
for the maintenance of ISO/IEC 29500 (OOXML).

WG4 reviewed the working draft "Widgets 1.0: Packaging and
Configuration" with interest.  It provides a package format similar to
the OPC(Open Packaging Conventions), which is specified in ISO/IEC
29500-2.  The text of the OPC specification is available as
ECMA 376 Part 2 (Second Edition)
<http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-376.htm>
and from the public ISO Website
<http://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/index.html>.

WG4 believes that widget packages and OPC packages are meant to meet
different requirements, and thus they cannot be unified in a hurry
without causing significant damage to OOXML, widgets, or both.
Requirements specific to OPC include file renaming and
fallback-guaranteed extensibility through ISO/IEC 29500-3 (Markup
Compatibility and Extensions).  Meanwhile, those specific to widget
packages include start files, icon files, localization, and
preferences among others.

Nevertheless, WG4 believes that there are quite a few similarities
between widget packages and OPC packages, and that information
exchange between the W3C Web Applications WG and WG4 would be very
fruitful.  Specifically, WG4 is interested in URI schemes, media
types, and UTF-8 part names.

WG4 understands that the widget package uses the latest version
(6.3.2) of the ZIP specification, which allows UTF-8.  Meanwhile,
ISO/IEC 29500-2 uses an earlier version (6.2.0) and relies on
the %HH convention, since 6.2.0 was the latest version when
Ecma TC45 started the first edition of OOXML.

JTC1/SC34/WG4 looks forward to your views on this matter.

Regards,

Mohamed ZERGAOUI on behalf of SC34/WG4 Convenor MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)

--
Innovimax SARL
Consulting, Training & XML Development
9, impasse des Orteaux
75020 Paris
Tel : +33 9 52 475787
Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
http://www.innovimax.fr
RCS Paris 488.018.631
SARL au capital de 10.000 €

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Letter to the W3C Web Applications WG from ISO JTC1/SC 34/WG4

Arthur Barstow
Hi,

Thanks for your e-mail.

Regarding your group following WebApps' widget-related specs, I think  
the easiest way is to subscribe to our Public mail list (public-
[hidden email]) (see [1]). Please note our latest publication status  
is provided at [2].

During our January 7 weekly widget voice conference, we briefly  
discussed [3] your e-mail. One area mentioned that could benefit from  
an open standard is ZIP (e.g. "ISO ZIP").

-Regards, Art Barstow

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/
[2] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/PubStatus
[3] http://www.w3.org/2010/01/07-wam-minutes.html#item03


On Dec 29, 2009, at 2:09 AM, ext Innovimax SARL wrote:

> Dear the W3C Web Applications WG,
>
> I am writing on behalf of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34/WG4, which is responsible
> for the maintenance of ISO/IEC 29500 (OOXML).
>
> WG4 reviewed the working draft "Widgets 1.0: Packaging and
> Configuration" with interest.  It provides a package format similar to
> the OPC(Open Packaging Conventions), which is specified in ISO/IEC
> 29500-2.  The text of the OPC specification is available as
> ECMA 376 Part 2 (Second Edition)
> <http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/ 
> Ecma-376.htm>
> and from the public ISO Website
> <http://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/index.html>.
>
> WG4 believes that widget packages and OPC packages are meant to meet
> different requirements, and thus they cannot be unified in a hurry
> without causing significant damage to OOXML, widgets, or both.
> Requirements specific to OPC include file renaming and
> fallback-guaranteed extensibility through ISO/IEC 29500-3 (Markup
> Compatibility and Extensions).  Meanwhile, those specific to widget
> packages include start files, icon files, localization, and
> preferences among others.
>
> Nevertheless, WG4 believes that there are quite a few similarities
> between widget packages and OPC packages, and that information
> exchange between the W3C Web Applications WG and WG4 would be very
> fruitful.  Specifically, WG4 is interested in URI schemes, media
> types, and UTF-8 part names.
>
> WG4 understands that the widget package uses the latest version
> (6.3.2) of the ZIP specification, which allows UTF-8.  Meanwhile,
> ISO/IEC 29500-2 uses an earlier version (6.2.0) and relies on
> the %HH convention, since 6.2.0 was the latest version when
> Ecma TC45 started the first edition of OOXML.
>
> JTC1/SC34/WG4 looks forward to your views on this matter.
>
> Regards,
>
> Mohamed ZERGAOUI on behalf of SC34/WG4 Convenor MURATA Makoto  
> (FAMILY Given)
>
> --
> Innovimax SARL
> Consulting, Training & XML Development
> 9, impasse des Orteaux
> 75020 Paris
> Tel : +33 9 52 475787
> Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
> http://www.innovimax.fr
> RCS Paris 488.018.631
> SARL au capital de 10.000 €
>