2009-132 Minutes

Duff Johnson - DJ, Chair Document Solutions

Mark Gavin - MG, Document Solutions

Leonard Rosenthol - LR, Adobe Systems

Neil Soiffer - NS, Design Science

Cherie Ekholm - CE, Microsoft

Greg Pisocky - GP, Adobe Systems

Approve Agenda

Ekholm / Soiffer

DIS on ISO 14289

DJ : Includes technical edits made by Cherie. Big issue remains numerous references to 32000-2 that only appear in 32000-2. 32000-2 itself will not be DIS itself until 2010 / 2011

• Accept DIS vote and proceed as is (not viable as 32000-2 does not exist and therefore cannot be used as a normative reference).
• Make a series of T-recommendations (technical edits to make 14289 work with 32000-1.

NS: Need to determine what relies on 3200-2 though the Math section may not be dependent upon it.

CE: will forward the list of 3200-2 dependincies to the other participants in the call.

MG: We never considered PDF/UA as a subset

LR: There is middle ground. The whole issue revolves around the fact that you cannot refer to a document as a normative reference until that standard is DIS. That said, there is nothing to prohibit us to produce a second document that is an informative document typically referred to as application notes. The application notes are going to be used by implementors.

DJ: I received a request from a German delegate that would like to see a mapping of PDF/UA to DAISY. This could be done as an application note.

LR: Continued list and Math

DJ: These would have to be redlined today, but would be implemented later.

DJ: Next item is tables. There is a table tag in 32000-1 which describes the structure tagging for tables.

NS: There would be a different implementation between 1 and 2 when it comes to tables. How one goes about traversing defined headers changes between 1 and 2.

LR: Cherie's recommendation should be in light of the 32000-2 is to

DJ: The question of the existing set of comments. A number of minor technical and mosttly editorial changes were made to the content of the material. Unless there is objection

Ratified: US Caucus has agreed to proceed with these edits per its own recommendation.

German delegation has asked that we proceed with items that would constitute an application note.

LR: The first is separate file format requirements and conforming reader requirements for clarity.

US position is more clarification needed from the German delegation. It is the US intent to seek clarification on both German items.

The second, Germany wants as many provisions as possible to be testable and verifiable.

The US Committe agrees this would be appropriate as an application note.

DJ: Next Question, should we make 14289 align with 32000-1?

LR: I would suggest that the US not present that, but that the Editor present the alignment with 32000-1 issue.

DJ: We have to make a decision concerning several technical edits in the email sent by Cherie.

LR: THe US caucus also needs an opinion regarding DIS or CD.

DJ: A DIS has the potential of being published early next year. A CD delays the publishing time frame for 5 to 6 months.

NS: Point of Information. There will be another ISO meeting in the spring where again the issue will come up as to whether it will be a DIS or not. My feeling is we should stay at CD as there may be more ramifications given these changes.

CE: CD there are too many changes here.

The US position is to go 14289 to CD due to number of anticipated changes.