From owner-sc35wg2+sc35wg2-domo2=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Thu Jan 30 19:53:09 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc35wg2-domo2 Delivered-To: sc35wg2-domo2@www.open-std.org Received: by www.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id C3DE535672F; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 19:53:09 +0100 (CET) Delivered-To: sc35wg2@open-std.org Received: from mail-wg0-f54.google.com (mail-wg0-f54.google.com [74.125.82.54]) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EAFA3567ED; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 19:53:07 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wg0-f54.google.com with SMTP id x13so6946311wgg.21 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 10:53:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:references:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:cc:from:subject:date:to; bh=XVvq/BJT0IePd6ZaBJ/DRF0wwrmkvmGJk9NL7eBaaqQ=; b=etllXrwQ4ebnX5gTgp1yT6ZFUY1bMN7Av26rKoHH4jR3o2ca/mlZfSbatXyinRfh1k +kDgkiduDL+GaajtegbDLU8oQmjYk4HavS8ddm+uwWg46Zzp/FvEjgnv7RevFJdgmdaK O5M9VK6mB93Hct2aGl/J3zybdlHcjqNhGGd0nu78hinaJzenbDix51P8zTqbSRqongfN 1n3M4jEEGMMDev7R5KDGe6wdelPK4hLQS09Ca2TAYxqtEo1tDqm98QepwVoaimeXZ1Ks hYyEsGup2tSg8ef/yXwe9zFf/PaB2ce1zBr9unCs1zbglQ01YCwdqxPboINveIAgo6MM JIjg== X-Received: by 10.194.188.80 with SMTP id fy16mr10308444wjc.30.1391107986423; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 10:53:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.107] (axelrod.plus.com. [81.174.245.58]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id fm3sm47608971wib.8.2014.01.30.10.53.03 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 30 Jan 2014 10:53:03 -0800 (PST) References: <20140128175022.50540358518@www.open-std.org> <20140130113040.6E6D23583BB@www.open-std.org> <20140130144959.A3205358314@www.open-std.org> <20140130181559.660D7358489@www.open-std.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) In-Reply-To: <20140130181559.660D7358489@www.open-std.org> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-BA4CBE31-8B33-4AB7-8339-0A1EC2832837 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: Cc: "Carter, James" , ALB , "yoshikazu-seki@aist.go.jp" , "jeeink@gmail.com" , "monique.mai@orange.com" , "keld@keldix.com" , "thibault.grouas@culture.gouv.fr" , "sc35wg1@open-std.org" , "philippe.magnabosco@afnor.org" , mouradi amelle , "sc35wg2@open-std.org" , "sc35wg4@open-std.org" , "sc35wg6@open-std.org" , "sc35wg8@open-std.org" X-Mailer: iPad Mail (11B554a) From: Andy Heath Subject: Re: (SC35WG6.165) (SC35WG1.513) RE: (SC35WG4.87) (SC35WG2.20) JTC1/SC35 meeting - Barcelona, week of 10 February 2014 Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 18:53:02 +0000 To: Khalid CHOUKRI Sender: owner-sc35wg2@open-std.org Precedence: bulk --Apple-Mail-BA4CBE31-8B33-4AB7-8339-0A1EC2832837 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Let me throw something else into this picture - sorry it's so late in the co= nversation but other work has prevented me paying attention till now - there= are many mails in this discussion waiting for me to read. I'm not able to a= ttend in Barcelona - if it's possible I would like to participate at least i= n some of the wg's remotely. Is that possible? Andy Heath=20 Sent from my iPad > On 30 Jan 2014, at 18:15, Khalid CHOUKRI wrote: >=20 > Hi Jim >=20 > Carter, James wrote, On 30/01/2014 15:49: >> How is Philippe going to circulate a "a general schedule of the meetings o= f the WGs 1,2,4,6,7)," when there has been NO consultation with the WG conve= nors? > This is indeed what I did ask Philippe to do yesterday and I will make sur= e that such plans are shared with all of us before end of the week , so I ho= pe to see this tomorrow. > Of course we can still revise it if necessary but at least I do expect to h= ave a clear picture of the way things are planned, coordinated , etc. like a= ll of us I guess; >=20 >> In order to have SC35 work efficiently it is essential that the needs of t= he WGs be considered. >=20 > Fully agree , for me SC35 is only the umbrella that is composed of all WGs= and it does not make sens to SC35 activities outside the WGs; >=20 > All the best > Khalid >=20 >=20 >>=20 >> Regards, Jim >> ________________________________ >> From: owner-sc35wg4@open-std.org [owner-sc35wg4@open-std.org] on behalf o= f Khalid CHOUKRI [choukri@elda.org] >> Sent: 30 January 2014 05:30 >> To: ALB; yoshikazu-seki@aist.go.jp; jeeink@gmail.com; monique.mai@orange.= com; keld@keldix.com; Carter, James; thibault.grouas@culture.gouv.fr >> Cc: sc35wg1@open-std.org; philippe.magnabosco@afnor.org; mouradi amelle; s= c35wg2@open-std.org; sc35wg4@open-std.org; sc35wg6@open-std.org; sc35wg8@ope= n-std.org >> Subject: (SC35WG4.87) (SC35WG2.20) (SC35WG1.507) JTC1/SC35 meeting - Barc= elona, week of 10 February 2014 >>=20 >> Hi Alain, >> I am responding to this email , now that we got more input from our secre= tariat, >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> ALB wrote, On 28/01/2014 15:57: >> Le 2014-01-28 =C3=A0 08:32, Khalid CHOUKRI a =C3=A9crit : >> Well I am surprised to see that (and hope this is only WG1!) , let us dis= cuss it again and see how to move forward. >>=20 >> [Alain] So far I have seen unanimity of those who expressed their views f= rom other WGs as well (Seki San, Jim, Monique, Karl, Keld, etc.). Nobody els= e said the view I expressed on GOM was not the best and most efficient one, a= nd the one understood in Saskatoon too at our infornal meeting. That is why I= say it is certainly only a misunderstanding between those who knew GOMs and= you, Khalid (no offence intended, of course, I'm just in search of the best= ). Btw GOM is a concept invented by AFNOR at the time (for meetings when the= secretary could not be present). It pleased everybody. It seems it still pl= eases. >>=20 >> I am happy to see that we all targeting the same objective, though we hav= e different approaches to achieve it. I do not think there was any misunders= tanding about the operations of the WGs, I have been briefed by Yves and Phi= lippe but yo are right (and I am not offended, I appreciate your fair and fr= iendly involvement in this discussion), I know that I have so much to learn.= But this does not (should not) prevent us from thinking of our approaches a= nd how to improve our processes. >>=20 >> I have seen that most of the work is done on site and I would like to see= more of this done during the periods between meetings via email, skype, and= if necessary wikis. >> I attended the JTC1 meeting last November and was surprised to see that m= ost of the SCs meet once a year (or even less), many of their WGs members m= eet at conferences for a day or two. >>=20 >>=20 >> Given Philippe's remarks , I suggest that we go ahead with the WGs meetin= gs (I have asked Philippe to circulate a general schedule of the meetings of= the WGs 1,2,4,6,7), and let us have a short meeting on Monday morning all t= ogether to plan the activities of the week. >>=20 >>=20 >> best regards >>=20 >> Khalid >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> Some other remarks: >>=20 >> 1) not all P-members are represented at Plenaries with a capital P, unfor= tunately. There is no reason to be more severe concerning this at resolution= plenaries with a small p. In general, except for one or 2 exceptions, membe= r bodies really participating in making projects attend all meetings (that s= aid without diminishing the importance of others who still show their solida= rity in the voting process of documents to be published, which is very impor= tant and the name of the game in international standards). >>=20 >> 2) The notion of quorum is important (both at Plenaries and "plenaries" [= GOMs]). Resolutions taken by GOMs should be as executory as those taken at P= lenaries because there is a quorum (without letter ballot to approve those r= esolutions again). Whether these resolutions are approved in a GOM or in a s= ingle WG should not matter. In other SCs, even when there is an interim meet= ing (no Plenary), resolutions of WGs are executory immediately ans are not a= pproved twice in a further letter ballot (case in point : JTC1/SC2, in which= I am active both as convernor and editor). >>=20 >> 3) GOMs just assures SC35 coherence, as there are multiple projects that i= nter-relates WGs (which may be not the case in other SCs). It is essential t= o have constant coherence, all year round. This GOM process does not violate= any ISO or IEC rule to my nowledge (on the contrary, it improves efficience= ), it is an internal process (checked by AFNOR at the time). It also ensures= there is no dispersion, and should be an asset more to ensure that nothing i= s forgotten, Dividing SC35 further would not be a good idea, it would be det= rimental to coherence, I'm convinced about this. >>=20 >> Alain >> --- >> Ce courrier =C3=A9lectronique ne contient aucun virus ou logiciel malveil= lant parce que la protection avast! Antivirus est active. >> http://www.avast.com >>=20 >>=20 >> -- >>=20 >> Khalid Choukri >> ELRA General secretary & ELDA CEO >> email: choukri@elda.org; >> Web: www.elra.info www.elda.org >> Tel. +33 1 43 13 33 33 - Fax. +33 1 43 13 33 30 >>=20 >> *************************************************** >> ** Info on LREC: www.lrec-conf.org >> **************************************************** >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >=20 > --=20 >=20 > Khalid Choukri=20 > ELRA General secretary & ELDA CEO=20 > email: choukri@elda.org;=20 > Web: www.elra.info www.elda.org=20 > Tel. +33 1 43 13 33 33 - Fax. +33 1 43 13 33 30=20 >=20 > *************************************************** > ** Info on LREC: www.lrec-conf.org=20 > **************************************************** >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail-BA4CBE31-8B33-4AB7-8339-0A1EC2832837 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Let me throw something else into this p= icture - sorry it's so late in the conversation but other work has prevented= me paying attention till now - there are many mails in this discussion wait= ing for me to read. I'm not able to attend in Barcelona - if it's possible I= would like to participate at least in some of the wg's remotely. Is that po= ssible?

Andy Heath 

Sent from my iPad

On 30 Jan 2014, at 18:15, Khalid CHOUKRI <choukri@elda.org> wrote:

=20 =20 =20 Hi Jim

Carter, James wrote, On 30/01/2014 15:49:
How is Philippe going to circulate a "a general schedul=
e of the meetings of the WGs 1,2,4,6,7)," when there has been NO consultatio=
n with the WG convenors?
This is indeed what I did ask Philippe to do yesterday and I will make sure that such plans are shared with all of us before end of the week , so I hope to see this tomorrow.
Of course we can still revise it if necessary but at least I do expect to have a clear picture of the way things are planned, coordinated , etc. like all of us I guess;

In order to have SC35 work efficiently it is essential t=
hat the needs of the WGs be considered.

Fully agree , for me SC35 is only the umbrella that is composed of all WGs and it does not make sens  to SC35 activities outside the WGs;

All the best
Khalid


Regards, Jim
________________________________
From: owner-sc35wg4@open-std.org [owner-sc35wg4@open-std.org] on behalf of Khalid CHOUKRI [choukri@elda.org]
Sent: 30 January 2014 05:30
To: ALB; yoshikazu-seki@aist.go.jp; jeeink@gmail.com; monique.mai@or=
ange.com; keld@keldix.com; Carter, James; thibault.grouas@cultur=
e.gouv.fr
Cc: sc35wg1@open-std.org; philippe.magnabosco@afnor.org; mour=
adi amelle; sc35wg2@open-std.org; sc35wg4@open-std.org; sc35wg6@open-st=
d.org; sc35wg8@open-std.org
Subject: (SC35WG4.87) (SC35WG2.20) (SC35WG1.507) JTC1/SC35 meeting - Barcelo=
na, week of 10 February 2014

Hi Alain,
I am responding to this email , now that we got more input from our secretar=
iat,



ALB wrote, On 28/01/2014 15:57:
Le 2014-01-28 =C3=A0 08:32, Khalid CHOUKRI a =C3=A9crit :
Well I am surprised to see that (and hope this is only WG1!) , let us discus=
s it again and see how to move forward.

[Alain]  So far I have seen unanimity of those who expressed their views fro=
m other WGs as well (Seki San, Jim, Monique, Karl, Keld, etc.). Nobody else s=
aid the view I expressed on GOM was not the best and most efficient one, and=
 the one understood in Saskatoon too at our infornal meeting. That is why I s=
ay it is certainly only a misunderstanding between those who knew GOMs and y=
ou, Khalid (no offence intended, of course, I'm just in search of the best).=
 Btw GOM is a concept invented by AFNOR at the time (for meetings when the s=
ecretary could not be present). It pleased everybody. It seems it still plea=
ses.

I am happy to see that we all targeting the same objective, though we have d=
ifferent approaches to achieve it. I do not think there was any misunderstan=
ding about the operations of the WGs, I have been briefed by Yves and Philip=
pe but yo are right (and I am not offended, I appreciate your fair and frien=
dly involvement in this discussion), I know that I have so much to learn. Bu=
t this does not (should not) prevent us from thinking of our approaches and h=
ow to improve our processes.

I have seen that most of the work is done on site and I would like to see mo=
re of this done during the periods between meetings via email, skype, and if=
 necessary wikis.
I attended the JTC1 meeting last November and was surprised to see that most=
 of the SCs meet once a year (or even less), many of their WGs members  meet=
 at conferences for a day or two.


Given Philippe's remarks , I suggest that we go ahead with the WGs meetings (=
I have asked Philippe to circulate a general schedule of the meetings of the=
 WGs 1,2,4,6,7), and let us have a short meeting on Monday morning all toget=
her to plan the activities of the week.


best regards

Khalid



   Some other remarks:

1) not all P-members are represented at Plenaries with a capital P, unfortun=
ately. There is no reason to be more severe concerning this at resolution pl=
enaries with a small p. In general, except for one or 2 exceptions, member b=
odies really participating in making projects attend all meetings (that said=
 without diminishing the importance of others who still show their solidarit=
y in the voting process of documents to be published, which is very importan=
t and the name of the game in international standards).

2) The notion of quorum is important (both at Plenaries and "plenaries" [GOM=
s]). Resolutions taken by GOMs should be as executory as those taken at Plen=
aries because there is a quorum (without letter ballot to approve those reso=
lutions again). Whether these resolutions are approved in a GOM or in a sing=
le WG should not matter. In other SCs, even when there is an interim meeting=
 (no Plenary), resolutions of WGs are executory immediately ans are not appr=
oved twice in a further letter ballot (case in point : JTC1/SC2, in which I a=
m active both as convernor and editor).

3) GOMs just assures SC35 coherence, as there are multiple projects that int=
er-relates WGs (which may be not the case in other SCs). It is essential to h=
ave constant coherence, all year round. This GOM process does not violate an=
y ISO or IEC rule to my nowledge (on the contrary, it improves efficience), i=
t is an internal process (checked by AFNOR at the time). It also ensures the=
re is no dispersion, and should be an asset more to ensure that nothing is f=
orgotten, Dividing SC35 further would not be a good idea, it would be detrim=
ental to coherence, I'm convinced about this.

Alain
---
Ce courrier =C3=A9lectronique ne contient aucun virus ou logiciel malveillan=
t parce que la protection avast! Antivirus est active.
http://www.=
avast.com


--

Khalid Choukri
ELRA General secretary & ELDA CEO
email: choukri@elda.org<mailto:choukri@elda.org>;
Web: www=
.elra.info<http://www.elra.info> www.elda.org<http://www.elda.org>
Tel. +33 1 43 13 33 33 - Fax. +33 1 43 13 33 30

***************************************************
** Info on LREC: www.lrec-conf.org<http://www.lrec-conf.org>
****************************************************






--

Khalid Choukri
ELRA General secretary & ELDA CEO
email: choukri@elda.org;
Web: www.elra.info www.elda.org
Tel. +33 1 43 13 33 33 - Fax. +33 1 43 13 33 30

***************************************************
** Info on LREC: www.lrec-conf.org
****************************************************




=20
= --Apple-Mail-BA4CBE31-8B33-4AB7-8339-0A1EC2832837--