AHG kick-off (was RE: [mpeg-OTspec] RE: Updates to script and language tags)

[Levantovsky, Vladimir]

Dear Bob, all

Thank you for your continued contributions to this group and for your efforts.
As you know, the last MPEG meeting was held on Jan. 21-25 where all contributions were discussed. Taking Bob’s comments into consideration, I also did an editorial review of all suggested and agreed changes, and after consulting with Michelle and her colleagues modified or eliminated some of the proposed language name changes. The consolidated summary of the agreed changes is attached to this email. I verified the language names and tags against both ISO and IANA registries to make sure that we don’t have any conflicting definitions.
I also would like to remind all that we are targeting the next meeting dates (April 22-26) as a tentative deadline to promote the new edition of the spec to the next stage (it has been in the working draft stage for a year now). It means that we need to try and finalize all remaining proposals under consideration. It would still be possible to introduce new text and make changes after the spec is promoted but the process for introducing changes would be much more formal and would require voting and ballot approvals. I would like to ask everyone on this list to consider this proposed schedule for spec changes (but it doesn’t mean that the April meeting is an absolute deadline – we *can* extend the document and keep it as a working draft if need be).
Again, thank you to all for your continued efforts!
Vladimir


From: mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com [mailto:mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bob Hallissy
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 8:30 PM
To: Michelle Perham
Cc: opentype-migration-list at indx.co.uk; OTspec (mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com)
Subject: Re: [mpeg-OTspec] RE: Updates to script and language tags




Actually, I did raise some issues which, as far as I can tell, have gone unanswered. And that was not with a detailed look at the names proposal.

Fundamentally: the proposal claims that the changes are to "more universally accepted" -- what authority is being used to identify such?

Lacking any information on the authority in use, I turned to iso639 and with just a cursory glance found some of the proposed names are not there -- so presumably some other authority is being referenced?

Bob



On 2013-01-11 at 16:33 Michelle Perham wrote:
I know that a number of people reviewed the list of proposed changes, but I didn’t receive any comments. If there are no objections, I’d like to propose that Vlad also add this to his working draft.
Michelle





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20130204/14a5a559/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/x-ygp-stripped
Size: 378 bytes
Desc: m28123-features+language-tags_OFF.zip
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20130204/14a5a559/attachment.bin>