Annual Report for Technical Committee X3L2 Covering the Period from November 1994 to October 1995 Title of X3 Subgroup: Codes and Character Sets Informal Description of Work X3L2 is responsible for the creation and maintenance for U.S. standards for the coding of graphic and control characters for use in information processing equipment and systems. Also, X3L2 is the U.S. TAG to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2, Character Sets and Information Coding. Graphic characters include the letters, digits, punctuation marks, symbols, ideographic characters, etc. Control characters encode some functions used for the transmission, storage, manipulation and representation of graphic characters and other information. Executive Summary The principal interest of X3L2 members is standardizing ISO/IEC 10646 (and the subset in the Unicode Standard) because it has strategic value for internationalization. The majority of member organizations are in the process of implementing or planning to implement ISO/IEC 10646-1. In 1994, after the ISO/IEC 10646:1993 standard was published, it seemed that the level of standards activity (and the controversy) were reduced. In fact, WG2 was deciding the direction for the next edition of the standard and the implementation strategy. Now, the second edition of 10646 is taking shape. Corrigenda-1 was approved. The architecture changes (DAM-1 through 4) have ballots due in December. Work is continuing on identifying and correcting defects, and proposing additions to the repertoire. Most of these are at the PDAM level. At this point, WG2 needs to define the additions for the second edition and a target delivery date. The interests of X3L2 are closely tied with Unicode, Inc. Unicode, Inc. is a member of X3L2. Unicode, Inc. plans to publish its book, The Unicode Standard Version 2.0 (which is compliant with corrections and amendments made to ISO/IEC 10646-1:1993) in 1996. In 1993, X3L2 met with X3V1 to jointly draft and submit a character-glyph operational model to SC2/WG2 and SC18/WG8. Both SC2/WG2 and SC18/WG8 endorsed the recommendations in the document. In January, SC2 approved a ballot on an NP to create a technical report type 3 on this topic. In June, X3L2 and X3V1 met again to refine the document and submitted the revision to SC2/WG2. SC2 voted at its plenary in Finland to process the document as a PDTR in parallel with the JTC1 ballot on the NP. X3L2 plans to continue to work with X3V1 to edit the document. X3L2 recommended reconfirmation of ISO 1831 and ISO 2375 and recommended adoption of ISO/IEC DISO 12070-1: ISP FCS111 - 2022 Option 1. In the national arena, ANSI adopted X3.83:1995 and withdrew X3.26. (In October, 1994, ANSI withdrew X3.6, X3.41, X3.64, X3.95, X3.110, and X3.114. This occurred too late to be included in the previous annual report). The X3 ballot for withdrawal of X3.32 is due on October 24. X3L2 recommended reaffirming X3.4:1986 (7-bit ASCII). The public review resulted in comments to which X3L2 needs to respond. In contrast with last year, this year X3L2 voting membership remained stable at ten. A new observer should become a member at the December meeting. The restructuring in the information industry, the poor economy, the competition, the publication of ISO/IEC 10646-1 and the emphasis on implementing it are continuing to affect X3L2. These dictate that X3L2 members focus much more on company business. In addition, several members are leaders in Unicode, Inc., SC2/WG2, SC22/WG20, ECMA TC1, and AFII, and they have limited time for X3L2 standards activities. With this focus on company business, X3L2 needs to make more effective use of the members’ time. In 1995, X3L2 met twice instead of three times. In addition, since most of the members regularly participate in the Unicode Technical Committee (UTC) meetings, X3L2 is collocating its meetings with the UTC. By collocating the meetings, members eliminated the trip expenses for a separate X3L2 meeting and shortened the number of days to attend both meetings. However, at the June meetings, the UTC agenda was unavailable until just before the meeting. To remedy this and to improve cooperation, the chairs of each committee will coordinate meeting logistics and jointly develop the agenda for a common meeting to discuss 10646/Unicode Standards topics and distribute it in time to satisfy X3 rules. X3L2 will also be distributing documents for the common meeting to UTC participants. Finally, people have obtained commitments to volunteer for the X3L2 chair and vice-chair, and one person needs to ask for a commitment for the IR position. At the December X3L2 meeting, we will be arranging for a smooth transition of officers. Table of Contents I. Projects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1. 4-L, Control Codes for 7-bit and 8-bit Sets . . . . . . . . . 5 2. 6-M, Graphic Representation of the Control Characters of ASCII . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. 12-RF, 7-Bit American National Standard Code for Information Interchange (7-bit ASCII). . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. 13-M, Code Registration Practices According to ISO 2375 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. 103-L, Hollerith Punched Card Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6. 105-L, Code Extension Techniques for Use with the 7- Bit Coded Character Set for ASCII. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7. 106-L, U.S. Candidates for Registry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 8. 107-L, Perforated Tape Code for Information Interchange. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9. 240-L, Coding of Character Sets for OCR and MICR . . . . . . . 9 10. 304-L, Hexadecimal I/O to Microprocessors Using 5-bit and 7-bit Teleprinters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 11. 392-M, Information Processing 8-Bit Single-Byte Coded Graphic Character Sets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 12. 396-D, Multiple Byte Graphic Character Set for Processing and Interchange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 13. 495-M, 8-Bit Code for Information Interchange Structure and Rules for Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 14. 1037-L, Implementation of the 7-bit coded character set and its 7-bit and 8-bit extensions on 9-track 12,7 mm (0.5 in) magnetic tape. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 15. 1038-L, Implementation of the 7-bit coded character set and its 7-bit and 8-bit extensions on 3,81 mm magnetic cassette. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 16. 1039-L, Coded graphic character set for text communication (revision of parts 1 & 2). . . . . . . . . . . . 14 17. 1040-L, Arabic 7-bit coded character set for information interchange. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 18. 1041-L, Standardized coded graphic character sets for use in 8-bit codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 19. 1042-L, Control functions for text communications. . . . . . . 16 20. 1141-L, ISO TR, An operational model for characters and glyphs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 II. Committee Activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 a. Previous Year's Meeting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 b. Next Year's Planned Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 c. Officers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 d. Membership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 e. Liaison Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 f. Administrative Matters of Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 g. Procedural Matters of Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 h. Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 III. Anticipated Projects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 IV. Future Trends in Area of Standardization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 I. Projects Number Title Editor 1. 4-L Control Codes for 7-bit and 8-bit Sets Greenwood 2. 6-M Graphic Representation of the Control Characters of ASCII Greenwood 3. 12-RF 7-Bit American Standard Code for Information Interchange (7-bit ASCII) Hart 4. 13-M Code Registration Practices According to ISO 2375 Hart 5. 103-L Hollerith Punched Card Code IR 6. 105-L Code Extension Techniques for Use with ASCII Greenwood 7. 106-L U.S. Candidates for Registry IR 8. 107-L Perforated Tape Code for Information Interchange IR 9. 240-L Coding of character sets for OCR and MICR IR 10. 304-L Hexadecimal I/O to Microprocessors using 5-bit and 7-bit Teleprinters IR 11. 392-M Information Processing 8-Bit Single-Byte Coded Graphic Character Sets Hart 12. 396-D Multiple Byte Graphic Character Set for Processing and Interchange Davis 13. 495-M 8-Bit Code for Information Interchange Structure and Rules for Implementation Hart 14. 1037-L Implementation of the 7-bit coded character set and its 7-bit and 8-bit extensions on 9-track 12,7 mm (0.5 in) magnetic tape IR 15. 1038-L Implementation of the 7-bit coded character set and its 7-bit and 8-bit extensions on 3,81 mm magnetic cassette IR 16. 1039-L Coded graphic character set for text communication (revision of parts 1 & 2) IR 17. 1040-L Arabic 7-bit coded character set for information interchange IR 18. 1041-L Standardized coded graphic character sets for use in 8- bit codes IR 19. 1042-L Control functions for text communications IR 20. 1141-L ISO TR, An operational model for characters and glyphs Hart 1. 4-L, Control Codes for 7-bit and 8-bit Sets a. Project Number and Title 4-L, Control Codes for 7-bit and 8-bit Sets b. dpANS Target Date to X3 NA c. Project Description Liaison project for ISO/IEC 6429:1992. d. Publications e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments A study indicated that X3.64 could be replaced with ISO/IEC 6429:1992. However, X3L2 decided to recommend withdrawing the ANSI standard and not adopt the corresponding ISO standard as an ANSI/ISO standard. ANSI withdrew the standard in October, 1994. f. Status as of This Report ANSI withdrew the X3.64 standard. g. Future Plans None. h. Reason for Delay N/A 2. 6-M, Graphic Representation of the Control Characters of ASCII a. Project Number and Title 6-M, Graphic Representation of the Control Characters of ASCII b. dpANS Target Date to X3 N/A c. Project Description Maintain ANSI X3.32 d. Publications None e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments Because ISO 2047:1975 duplicated the ANSI standard, X3L2 recommended withdrawing X3.32 and changing the project to a liaison project. The X3 ballot to withdraw the standard closes on October 24. f. Status as of This Report X3 is balloting withdrawing the standard. g. Future Plans none. h. Reason for Delay N/A 3. 12-RF, 7-Bit American National Standard Code for Information Interchange (7-bit ASCII) a. Project Number and Title 12-RF, 7-Bit American National Standard Code for Information Interchange (7-bit ASCII) b. dpANS Target Date to X3 N/A c. Project Description Maintain X3.4-1986 and strive for consistency between it and ISO 646. d. Publications e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments X3L2 recommended reaffirming X3.4. During the public review, X3 received comments from one organization concerning alignment of X3.4 and ISO/IEC 646:1991. X3L2 has not yet responded to the comments. f. Status as of This Report X3L2 recommended reaffirming X3.4-1986. g. Future Plans Respond to the comments, determine if the organization making the comments is willing to contribute to revising X3.4, and decide whether to revise X3.4-1986. h. Reason for Delay N/A 4. 13-M, Code Registration Practices According to ISO 2375 (Edwin Hart) a. Project Number and Title 13-M, Code Registration Practices According to ISO 2375 b. dpANS Target Date to X3 N/A c. Project Description Maintain X3.83-1988, USA Sponsorship Procedures for ISO Registration. d. Publications None. e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments In 1994, X3L2 decided that X3.83 required revision and obtained approval from OMC to do so. The draft of the revision was sent to X3 in August, 1994. In April, X3L2 revised the document to satisfy comments from the ANSI editor. In August, ANSI approved it as an ANSI standard. f. Status as of This Report ANSI approved the standard in August, 1995. g. Future Plans Publish X3.83 in 1995. h. Reason for Delay N/A 5. 103-L, Hollerith Punched Card Code a. Project Number and Title 103-L, Hollerith Punched Card Code b. dpANS Target Date to X3 N/A c. Project Description Liaison for ISO standard. d. Publications None e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments X3L2 recommended withdrawing the ANSI standard. In October, 1994, X3L2 responded to the comment obtained during the public review. X3 voted to withdraw the standard and ANSI withdrew the standard in May, 1995. f. Status as of This Report ANSI withdrew the ANSI standard in May, 1995. g. Future Plans None. h. Reason for Delay N/A 6. 105-L, Code Extension Techniques for Use with the 7-Bit Coded Character Set for ASCII a. Project Number and Title 105-L, Code Extension Techniques for Use with the 7- Bit Coded Character Set for ASCII b. dpANS Target Date to X3 NA c. Project Description Liaison project for ISO/IEC 2022. d. Publications e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments None. f. Status as of This Report ANSI withdrew X3.41. WG3 submitted ISO/IEC 2022:1994 for publication. g. Future Plans None. h. Reason for Delay N/A 7. 106-L, U.S. Candidates for Registry a. Project Number and Title 106-L, U.S. Candidates for Registry b. dpANS Target Date to X3 N/A c. Project Description Sponsor character sets to be registered by the International Registration Authority in accordance with ISO 2375. d. Publications e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments In 1993, X3L2 received a request to have the U.S. ask ISO to register the Indian ISCII standard. X3L2 has requested ANSI to ask the Indian National Body to submit the request to ISO to register its standard. At ANSI’s request, X3L2 resubmitted the request to ANSI in the spring of 1994. f. Status as of This Report India has not requested registration of the ISCII character set. g. Future Plans Monitor the status of the ISCII request by ANSI. Consider submitting a request to ECMA that the ISCII code be registered. h. Reason for Delay N/A 8. 107-L, Perforated Tape Code for Information Interchange a. Project Number and Title 107-M, Perforated Tape Code for Information Interchange b. dpANS Target Date to X3 N/A c. Project Description Liaison project for the ISO standard. d. Publications None e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments X3L2 decided to recommend withdrawing the ANSI standard. f. Status as of This Report ANSI withdrew the standard. g. Future Plans With the 5-year reaffirmation ballot for the international standard, vote to withdraw it. h. Reason for Delay N/A 9. 240-L, Coding of Character Sets for OCR and MICR a. Project Number and Title 240-L, Coding of Character Sets for OCR and MICR b. dpANS Target Date to X3 N/A c. Project Description Liaison project for ISO 2033 and ISO 1073. d. Publications None e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments In 1994, JTC1/SC2 distributed a ballot for CD 1073- 2:1994 for OCR-B. It is unclear of the proper subcommittee and working group for this effort within ISO. f. Status as of This Report no change. g. Future Plans None. h. Reason for Delay N/A 10. 304-L, Hexadecimal I/O to Microprocessors Using 5-bit and 7-bit Teleprinters a. Project Number and Title 304-L, Hexadecimal Input/Output to Microprocessors Using 5-bit and 7-bit Teleprinters b. dpANS Target Date to X3 N/A c. Project Description Liaison project for ISO 6936. d. Publications None e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments X3L2 decided to recommend withdrawing the ANSI standard. f. Status as of This Report ANSI withdrew the U.S. standard in Oct. 1994.. g. Future Plans With the 5-year reaffirmation ballot for the international standard, vote to withdraw it. h. Reason for Delay N/A 11. 392-M, Information Processing 8-Bit Single-Byte Coded Graphic Character Sets a. Project Number and Title 392-M, Information Processing 8-Bit Single-Byte Coded Graphic Character Sets b. dpANS Target Date to X3 NA c. Project Description Maintain ANSI/ISO 8859-1 and provide liaison for the parts of ISO/IEC 8859. d. Publications None e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments JTC1/SC2/WG3 is revising the various parts of 8859 standard to reflect the character names in ISO/IEC 10646-1:1993. WG3 plans to add additional parts to 8859. f. Status as of This Report No change. g. Future Plans The U.S. should adopt the next version of 8859-1 as a U.S. standard. h. Reason for Delay NA 12. 396-D, Multiple Byte Graphic Character Set for Processing and Interchange a. Project Number and Title 396-D, Multiple Byte Graphic Character Set for Processing and Interchange b. dpANS Target Date to X3 unknown, depends on obtaining a volunteer to author the standard c. Project Description Develop an international standard for a multiple-byte multi-lingual graphic character-set, in which all characters are coded as the same number of bits to facilitate interchange and processing, especially in higher level languages. d. Publications e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments ISO published ISO/IEC 10646-1:1993 in May, 1993. WG2 is preparing for the second edition of 10646 by correcting defects, resolving architectural issues, and adding scripts. WG2 has not yet set a target date for publication and what will be included in the second edition. WG2 has resolved several architecture and procedure issues that were deferred to publish the standard. WG2 has decided the disposition of several defect reports. In addition, the members of SC2 approved DCOR, which resolved the names of the Æ and æ characters. The members of SC2 approved: PDAM-1 UTF-16 architecture extension PDAM-2 UTF-8 extension (X/Open’s FSS-UTF) PDAM-3 encoding of C1 set of control characters PDAM-4 withdraw Annex G, UTF-1 PDAM-5 encoding of Korean Hangul The U.S. supported all five PDAMs. However, for PDAM- 5, the U.S. requested that the current encoding of Hangul in ISO/IEC 10646-1:1993 be immediately deprecated upon approval of this amendment. ISO has issued ballots for DAM-1, DAM-2, DAM-3, and DAM-4 with ballots due in December. After the resolution of comments on PDAM-5 at the November WG2 meeting in Tokyo, SC2/WG2 will request a ballot on DAM-5. The adoption of PDAM-5 (and then DAM-5) will resolve the concerns of a year ago of a U.S. company creating a non-standard variation of 10646. After the December, 1994, Unicode Technical Committee meeting, the U.S. company agreed to work together with the standards community to effect the desired change. SC2 has recently issued ballots for additional PDAMs and a second corrigenda. PDAM-6 Tibetan Script PDAM-7 Additional Miscellaneous Characters PDAM-8 Informative Annex on CJK Ideographs DCOR-2 Technical Corrigenda Number 2 X3L2 remains concerned about the direction 10646 will take in the future. The principal concern is allocation of the 24,000 remaining locations in the Basic Multilingual Plan (BMP). This space is precious because it requires only 16 bits for encoding and areas outside of the BMP require 32 bits. Everyone wants their scripts encoded in the BMP. Adoption of UTF-16 (DAM-1) should help reduce the pressure to encode everything in the BMP. WG2 has made resolutions about classification and allocation of future scripts. However, once WG2 starts discussing the actual allocation of scripts to code space, X3L2 is concerned that the WG2 resolutions may unravel, particularly after the PDAM-5 that adds 11,000 Korean Hangul characters and removes the original 6,500 Hangul characters.. In the spring, ECMA TC1 had proposed supporting the 10646 editor, creating the next version of 10646 as an ECMA standard and then submitting it via the ISO fast track procedure. While the U.S. appreciated the help that ECMA proposed, the U.S. opposed some specifics of the proposal. Subsequently, ECMA changed the proposal to one that is acceptable. The ECMA standard will be exactly the same as the ISO/IEC standard and ECMA will let WG 2 use the full ISO ballot procedure to obtain the maximum consensus for the next version. However, ECMA is questioning the value it is receiving from TC1. Unless TC1 identifies new work with a high value to ECMA, ECMA may decide to withdraw its support of its 10646 effort. X3L2 is also concerned about the vast price difference in cost of the two volumes of Unicode Version 1 (about $60 or $70) versus the $325 cost for ISO/IEC 10646-1 from ANSI. If ECMA produces the next version of 10646 as an ECMA standard, this will alleviate the concern. However, ECMA may decide to drop its effort. In addition, in June, 1992, X3L2 voted to begin work to adopt Unicode as a U.S. profile of ISO/IEC 10646-1. X3L2 has made almost no progress in this effort because of lack of an editor. The proposed U.S. standard would describe (1) how Unicode complies with ISO/IEC 10646-1 and (2) the implementation extensions to 10646-1 included in Unicode. The Unicode Standard Version 2.0 book with its implementation has been delayed until 1996. The book will include a CD-ROM with conversion tables, tables of character attributes, Unicode Technical Reports, etc. The new version of the Unicode Standard matches the encoding in ISO/IEC 10646-1:1993, plus the WG2 corrigenda, plus UTF-16, UTF-8, and the new encoding for Korean Hangul. (DAM 1 through 4, plus PDAM-5). Thus, Unicode, Inc. continues to track ISO/IEC 10646 in the Unicode Standard. f. Status as of This Report WG2 has several ballots outstanding. WG2 continues to review proposals to add new scripts. WG2 has not yet set a target date for publication of the second edition nor decided what will be included in it. DAM-1 UTF-16 architecture extension DAM-2 UTF-8 extension (X/Open’s FSS-UTF) DAM-3 encoding of C1 set of control characters DAM-4 withdraw Annex G, UTF-1 PDAM-5 encoding of Korean Hangul (passed) PDAM-6 Tibetan Script PDAM-7 Additional Miscellaneous Characters PDAM-8 Informative Annex on CJK Ideographs DCOR-2 Technical Corrigenda Number 2 g. Future Plans Continue to work with SC2/WG2 to see that U.S. requirements are met. X3L2 will be working with X3V1 to revise the U.S. contribution of the character- glyph operational model for eventual submission as an ISO technical report (TR). X3L2 still plans to create an ANSI standard for the Unicode profile of 10646. h. Reason for Delay Normal delays in processing a complex and controversial international standard. Need for an editor with a time commitment to develop the ANSI standard. 13. 495-M, 8-Bit Code for Information Interchange Structure and Rules for Implementation a. Project Number and Title 495-M, 8-Bit ASCII Structure and Rules b. dpANS Target Date to X3 NA c. Project Description Maintain ANSI/ISO 4873. d. Publications e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments No change. f. Status as of This Report No change. g. Future Plans None. h. Reason for Delay NA 14. 1037-L, Implementation of the 7-bit coded character set and its 7-bit and 8-bit extensions on 9-track 12,7 mm (0.5 in) magnetic tape a. Project Number and Title 1037-L, Implementation of the 7-bit coded character set and its 7-bit and 8-bit extensions on 9-track 12,7 mm (0.5 in) magnetic tape b. dpANS Target Date to X3 N/A c. Project Description Liaison for ISO 962:1974. d. Publications e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments None f. Status as of This Report N/A g. Future Plans None h. Reason for Delay N/A 15. 1038-L, Implementation of the 7-bit coded character set and its 7-bit and 8-bit extensions on 3,81 mm magnetic cassette a. Project Number and Title 1038-L, Implementation of the 7-bit coded character set and its 7-bit and 8-bit extensions on 3,81 mm magnetic cassette b. dpANS Target Date to X3 N/A c. Project Description Liaison for ISO 3275:1974. d. Publications e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments None f. Status as of This Report N/A g. Future Plans None h. Reason for Delay N/A 16. 1039-L, Coded graphic character set for text communication (revision of parts 1 & 2) a. Project Number and Title 1039-L, Coded graphic character set for text communication (revision of parts 1 & 2) b. dpANS Target Date to X3 N/A c. Project Description Liaison for ISO/IEC 6937:1994. d. Publications e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments None f. Status as of This Report N/A g. Future Plans None h. Reason for Delay N/A 17. 1040-L, Arabic 7-bit coded character set for information interchange a. Project Number and Title 1040-L, Arabic 7-bit coded character set for information interchange b. dpANS Target Date to X3 N/A c. Project Description Liaison for ISO 9036:1987. d. Publications e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments None f. Status as of This Report N/A g. Future Plans None h. Reason for Delay N/A 18. 1041-L, Standardized coded graphic character sets for use in 8- bit codes a. Project Number and Title 1041-L, Standardized coded graphic character sets for use in 8-bit codes b. dpANS Target Date to X3 N/A c. Project Description Liaison for ISO/IEC 10367:1991. d. Publications e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments JTC1/SC2/WG3 is planning to revise 10367 to reflect the character names of ISO/IEC 10646-1. f. Status as of This Report N/A g. Future Plans None h. Reason for Delay N/A 19. 1042-L, Control functions for text communications a. Project Number and Title 1042-L, Control functions for text communications b. dpANS Target Date to X3 N/A c. Project Description Liaison for ISO/IEC 10538:1991. d. Publications e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments None f. Status as of This Report N/A g. Future Plans None h. Reason for Delay N/A 20. 1141-L, ISO TR, An operational model for characters and glyphs a. Project Number and Title 1141-L, ISO TR, An operational model for characters and glyphs b. dpANS Target Date to X3 N/A c. Project Description Liaison for X3L2 and X3V1 work on developing an ISO/IEC Technical Report Type 3, An operational model for characters and glyphs. d. Publications e. Statement of Progress/Accomplishments In November, 1993, SC2/WG2 and SC18/WG8 accepted the September, 1993, X3L2 and X3V1 document, Character/Glyph Model. In January, 1995, SC2 approved ballot for a NP to develop a Type 3 ISO Technical Report. In June, 1995, X3L2 and X3V1 collocated meetings to revise the character/glyph model and submitted the revision to SC2/WG2 with an offer of Hart and Griffee as editors. At its June Plenary Meeting, SC2 resolved to process the NP and DPTR in parallel. In September, the SC2 Secretariat submitted this request to the JTC1 Secretariat and to ISO ITTF in Geneva. f. Status as of This Report Waiting for ISO ballots for the NP and for the DPTR. g. Future Plans Al Griffee plans to have an ad hoc meeting on the character/glyph model at the October, SC18/WG8 meeting. X3L2 had planned to collocate its December meeting with X3V1 to work on the document but this fell through. X3L2 is looking for a host to try to collocated the June meeting with X3V1 (and the Unicode Technical Committee). h. Reason for Delay N/A II. Committee Activities a. Previous Year's Meeting WG2/IRG 5 19-23 June 1995 Seoul, Korea UTC 63 Cupertino, CA 30 Nov., 1 Dec. 1994 X3L2 164 Cupertino, CA 30 Nov., 2 Dec. 1994 X3V1 Los Angeles, CA 12-15 Dec. 1994 UTC 64 Toronto? Mar. 1995 JTC1/SC2/WG2 Switzerland 3-7 Apr. 1995 UTC 65 Mountain View, CA 6 Jun. 1995 X3L2 165 Mountain View, CA 5,7 Jun. 1995 X3V1 Mountain View, CA 7-9 Jun. 1995 JTC1/SC2/WG2 Finland 26-28 Jun. 1995 JTC1/SC2/WG3 Finland 23 Jun. 1995 JTC1/SC2 Finland 29-30 Jun. 1995 UTC 66 Cambridge, MA 29 Sept. 1995 SC22/WG20 25-29 Sept Copenhagen b. Next Year's Planned Meetings JTC1/SC2/WG2 Tokyo, Japan 6-10 Nov. 1995 X3L2 166 Palo Alto/Cupertino, CA 7-8 Dec. 1995 UTC 67 Cupertino, CA 8 Dec. 1995 UTC 68 S.F. Bay Area March 1996 WG2 Copenhagen, Denmark April 1996 X3L2 167 ? June 1996 UTC 69 ? June 1996 X3V1 ? June 1996 WG2 Quebec, Canada August 1996 WG3 Quebec, Canada August 1996 SC2 Quebec, Canada August 1996 UTC 70 ? Sept. 1996 X3L2 168 ? Dec. 1996 UTC 71 ? Dec. 1996 X3V1 ? Dec. 1996 c. Officers Chairman (X3 Training in March 1993) Edwin F. Hart TEL: 301 953-6926 SHARE Inc. FAX: 301 953-1093 Applied Physics LaboratoryE-Mail: Edwin.Hart@jhuapl.edu 11100 Johns Hopkins Road Laurel, Maryland 20723-6099 Vice-Chairman (X3 training in January 1993) (Open) International Representative (X3 Training in March 1993) Arnold F. Winkler TEL: 215 986-2371 Unisys FAX: 215 986-5600 MS E8-134 E-Mail: awinkler@ po3.bb.unisys.com Township Line Road Blue Bell, PA 19424 Secretary (no X3 training) Open (rotated assignment for each meeting) Vocabulary (no X3 training) Open d. Membership The X3L2 voting (P) membership was stable over the last two years at 10. One observer (Silicon Graphics, Inc.) plans to become a member. However, when Xerox withdrew, X3L2 lost Joe Becker, the father of Unicode, as an observer. Principal Members: 10 Alternate Members: 8 Observers: 3 Pending: 1 In Jeopardy: 1 See enclosed X3L2/SD-1, Membership and Mailing List for more details. X3L2 Principal Members Peter K. Edberg Apple Computer Tim Greenwood Digital Equipment Corporation Michael Y. Ksar Hewlett Packard Alan W. Griffee IBM Corporation Michel Suignard Microsoft Corporation Joan Aliprand The Research Libraries Group, Inc. Edwin F. Hart SHARE Inc. (Applied Physics Laboratory) John H. Jenkins Taligent, Inc. Steve Greenfield Unicode, Inc. Arnold F. Winkler Unisys X3L2 Alternate Members John McConnell Apple Computer Timothy A. Lasko Digital Equipment Corporation Don Carroll Hewlett Packard Gary Miller IBM Corporation Karen Smith-Yoshimura The Research Libraries Group, Inc. Mark E. Davis Taligent Inc. X3L2 Observers Lloyd Anderson Ecological Linguistics Michael Kung Silicon Graphics, Inc. Edwin J. Smura Readi Consultant e. Liaison Activities X3L2 and the Unicode Technical Committee (UTC) have had collocated meeting and plan to collocate future meetings. In fact, X3L2 and the UTC plan much closer cooperation than in the past. X3L2 and X3V1 arranged to collocate their meetings in June, 1995 to revise the character-glyph operational model. We plan to collocate with X3V1 at least once in 1996 to complete work on the document and deliver an ISO Technical Report. To keep abreast of work in other standards committees that would be overlapping or duplicating its work, X3L2 maintains liaison with the following committees. Committee Representative JTC1/SC2 Character Sets and Information Coding A. Winkler SC2/WG2 Universal Coded Character Set A. Winkler SC2/WG3 7-bit and 8-bit Codes A. Winkler ECMA TC1 Character Sets and Coding M. Ksar X3J11 C Language T. Greenwood X3K5 Vocabulary (open) X3T2 Data Interchange (ASN.1) E. Hart X3V1 Text: Office and Publishing Systems A. Griffee NISO(Z39) National Information Standards Organization J. Aliprand WG2/IRG Ideographic Rapporteur Group J. Jenkins f. Administrative Matters of Note None g. Procedural Matters of Note i. In 1995, X3L2 reduced the number of meetings to two per year and reduced the meeting duration to one to three days per meeting. At the request of the Unicode Technical Committee (UTC), X3L2 collocated its meetings with the UTC in December, 1994 and again in June, 1995. The intent was to have a common meeting to discuss 10646/Unicode topics. This would reduce the time in 10646/Unicode discussions and make it easier for people to justify participation in, and travel to, both meetings. We were successful in December and had a common meeting (the UTC meeting). In June, both meetings were in the San Francisco Bay Area but the UTC met on Friday, and X3L2 met Monday and Tuesday in conjunction with X3V1. Since the UTC agenda was not ready until less that two weeks before the X3L2 Meeting, X3L2 did not attempt to have a joint meeting with the UTC. Over the summer, the UTC and X3L2 agreed to cooperate more closely and drafted guidelines which were reviewed by the X3 Secretariat. The respective chairs of the UTC and X3L2 have agreed on the guidelines and X3L2 will submit them to X3 for approval. ii. At the June Meeting, after the administrative topics, X3L2 split into two parallel ad hoc meetings. The first discussed revisions to the character-glyph operational model document. The second discussed other topics on the technical agenda. The next day, X3L2 met in plenary session to vote on resolutions developed in each ad hoc meeting. h. Recommendations i. X3L2 suggests that the X3 Secretariat add a section in the procedures (SD-2) to identify criteria for deciding to withdraw a standard and/or characterize the differences between a standard that is maintained and a standard that is withdrawn. ii. The technical committees could benefit from a periodic visit from their respective OMC liaisons. This would improve communication between the technical committees and OMC. This is the reverse of the technical committee's annual report where the chairman reports to OMC. To avoid imposing too large a burden on the OMC liaisons, I recommend an interval of between 24 to 36 months between visits. The reason for this suggestion is that at the June 1992 meeting, X3L2 members found the X3 officers training and following discussions with Jim Converse to be extremely valuable. Because of Mr. Converse's extensive knowledge, we were able to discuss concerns and obtain answers immediately and understand where the issues were. III. Anticipated Projects In June, 1992, X3L2 decided it wanted to create an ANSI standard for the Unicode profile of ISO/IEC 10646-1:1993. Thus far, X3L2 has only outlined the implementation requirements that Unicode adds to 10646. X3L2 is waiting for a volunteer with a commitment to draft the document before proceeding. X3L2 requested becoming the U.S. TAG for the SC22/WG20 effort to define a sorting algorithm and default ordering for the 10646 character set. OMC decided to retain the SC22 TAG as the TAG for WG20 but the SC22 TAG will request liaison comments from X3L2 on this effort. IV. Future Trends in Area of Standardization The current economic and competitive climate is such that fewer organizations are willing to make commitments and many are reducing participation. Standards participation now needs to contribute to an organizations products or services. One consequence is that some organizations have stopped supporting standards activities that have little or no value to them. Rather, they focus on the development of standards that they intend to support. This industry climate appears unlikely to change in the foreseeable future. In view of this trend, standards committees need to help their members by selecting meaningful work, focusing the meetings to make more effective use of the participants’ time, shortening the meetings, reducing their number, and scheduling them to reduce time away from the office. One of the major concerns has been obtaining commitments for officers. Several of the X3L2 members are officers of Unicode, Inc. or conveners of international working groups and technical committees and they already have significant volunteer commitments. The current industry climate does not help. Although many X3L2 members are qualified, few of them can obtain commitments. As the time comes to reaffirm ANSI standards, X3L2 will continue to investigate international standards as potential replacements for older U.S. standards. The information industry's demand for interoperability dictates the need for standards, whether industry or formal standards. However, as someone so cleverly phrased it, The advantage of standards is that we have so many to choose from. Too many overlapping or conflicting standards defeat the purpose of having standards and drastically reduce their effectiveness as vehicles for interoperability. The need is particularly acute for multilingual applications. What is needed? For interoperability, we need to focus on fewer standards. This requires broader more-encompassing standards. X3L2 strongly believes that ISO/IEC 10646 is such a standard. Although the U.S. is looking internationally for broader standards, we see competition and cooperation from industry consortia producing standards outside the formal standards process. Unicode, Inc. is particularly significant to X3L2 and SC2/WG2 as an organization that is cooperating with the standardization efforts. Last year, Unicode, Inc. formally joined X3L2. Unicode, Inc. also maintains a liaison relationship with SC2/WG2. More consortia applied for liaison status with SC2 this year. However, X3L2 sees a possible break in this cooperation. The time required to update ISO/IEC 10646 remains an issue as the standard is implemented in products. Organizations can foresee market opportunities that require extensions to the standard that because of the ISO/IEC standardization process, will require at least 12 to 18 months from identification to an adopted change. The perceived marketing opportunity may induce an organization to implement before standardization. After standardization, it is unclear if an organization will have sufficient incentive to retrofit its implementation to be compliant. While this has always been an issue with standards, it would be extremely unfortunate after all of the efforts to merge Unicode and 10646 to have companies implement products that do not comply with 10646 (or Unicode) and refuse to retrofit the products for compliance after standardization of the needed change. Although such a split over coding of the Korean Hangul script was avoided, we may not be so fortunate in the future. ISO/IEC 10646 is an open-ended standard. The first edition encodes some 30,000 or 40,000 characters. Unicode, Inc. has estimated the number of potential characters for encoding to be about 250,000 characters. Thus, WG2 could be adding characters and new scripts to 10646 for several years. Rather than having an expert or a country propose a particular script addition, WG2 is encouraging interested parties to obtain consensus on a proposal before submission to WG2. Unicode, Inc. did this at its June meeting when it invited experts from China and Tibet and where they reached consensus on a proposal for the Tibetan script. Even though WG2 has many more scripts to encode, industry interest and participation may decline as WG2 tries to standardize encoding for scripts with little commercial value. It is unclear if others will be aware that they can participate and, once they know, be able to afford it. [End of X3L2/95-064]