From owner-sc35wg4+sc35wg4-domo=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Sun Mar 11 13:20:40 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc35wg4-domo Delivered-To: sc35wg4-domo@www.open-std.org Received: by www.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id 4B4C735698C; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 13:20:40 +0100 (CET) Delivered-To: sc35wg4@open-std.org Received: from mail-we0-f175.google.com (mail-we0-f175.google.com [74.125.82.175]) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A01A35684F; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 13:20:36 +0100 (CET) Received: by wera1 with SMTP id a1so3304474wer.34 for ; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 05:20:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=osUjXpbZbFUXg/Y50NukDMRNw12yRmhl5FDIvQI6/K4=; b=C2i4rGJgr2bElSsk6shmqs3+oYkifRQp/jH3H7CVyDihYILzRBhlay0EVEYv/0mRmV 8r1fZj7gWC1pukyxPTV3paVakokOQueyWGd9h7hwTQI9h6RhYJUPFwuGpncjtmETOsn7 1vBgRru37PIEvWp6JkVtvHVA2/UJM/Sp65FKknOkl1Lc3k92W6mN+kpfwdchCrfrXbax SMK5uzH5t7eoCtAZwCZwO74sh8ikTQ3vVX21l+LRrr+2QUS2JRw5SN/tifQOjZlA7jyV UUBqrJWwCNOFbiXsFw81wuOXkBcTAKnGbHffWc8yNrAWvqersaiEpjWA65mebL4Wv8dD sI0g== Received: by 10.216.134.24 with SMTP id r24mr5064808wei.84.1331468436322; Sun, 11 Mar 2012 05:20:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from andrew-heaths-macbook-pro.local (axelrod.plus.com. [81.174.245.58]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 9sm41635010wid.2.2012.03.11.05.20.32 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 11 Mar 2012 05:20:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4F5C988F.6050403@axelrod.plus.com> Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 12:20:31 +0000 From: Andy Heath User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andy Heath CC: Hiroaki IKEDA , sc35wg4@open-std.org, sc35wg1@open-std.org, ikeda@jsa.or.jp, =?UTF-8?B?QWxhaW5fTGFCb250w6k=?= , jaeil@nia.or.kr Subject: Re: (SC35WG1.335) Revised WD 17549 (4-direction devices) References: <20120229034257.97BBD9DB114@www.open-std.org> <20120306155520.76861356945@www.open-std.org> <20120306220605.23A7F356941@www.open-std.org> <4F56BDDB.1060706@axelrod.plus.com> <20120307124800.20BBA356945@www.open-std.org> <20120307181203.148263569A2@www.open-std.org> <20120308221932.F2048356973@www.open-std.org> <20120309002414.00003557.0033@faculty.chiba-u.jp> <20120309120849.806C635699F@www.open-std.org> <20120311072509.E946A356998@www.open-std.org> <20120311095957.780C435684F@www.open-std.org> In-Reply-To: <20120311095957.780C435684F@www.open-std.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-sc35wg4@open-std.org Precedence: bulk Actually don't worry - I'm pretty sure you picked up most of them. andy > Dear Professor Ikeda, Dear Mr Jaeil SONG, and others > > I'm sorry but there might be a small problem - MsWord is misbehaving on > my machine and not always showing tracked changes properly - I think its > something with memory. Can you and/or Mr Jaeil SONG check something for > me please > > There are two files involved > > 1. ISO-CEI-JTC001-SC35_N1783_WD_17549~2_Rev1akh.doc > 2. ISO-CEI-JTC001-SC35_N1783_WD_17549~2_Rev1akh2.doc > > In 1. I made many small changes to the text (but not the Annex) and also > made comments on pieces of text independent of the comments. > For example, on page 2 there are 5 changed sections and 2 extra comments > on pieces of text, on page 3 there are 10 changed sections and 1 > commented piece of text. > > I then copied file 1. to file 2. and in 2. I continued to edit the > Annex. However, when I look now at 2. there is something wrong with the > change-tracking - I cannot see any of the changes I made to 1. That is > they are in the text but do not show as tracked whatever settings I > have. I can see them in 1. but not in 2. with the same settings. > Can you just confirm you picked up all the changes and they aren't just > there without being reviewed ? Its probably fine - I'll edit rev3 on a > machine with more memory but if you could confirm you caught them that > would be useful. > > Thanks > > andy > > > >> Dear Andy, >> dear WG 1 and WG 4 members, >> >> Many thanks indeed to your review and inputs on SC 35 N 1806. >> >> As editor of ISO/IEC 17549, I collaborated with co-editor Mr Jaeil SONG >> on 10th and 11th March using Skype and e-mail exchange to reflect the >> inputs and any improvement. >> >> A result of collaboration up to now is attached for your further review >> until 2012-03-15, when a finalized document will be submitted to >> conveners of WG 1 and WG 4 for their consideration as 1st CD. >> >> With best regards, >> Hiroaki IKEDA, Project Editor 17549 >> >> (2012/03/09 21:08), Andy Heath wrote: >>> Dear Professor Ikeda and all, >>> >>> now done. >>> In the cases where I have been unsure of the meaning I have commented >>> to this effect - I am happy to revisit those cases after clarification >>> if they can be marked up in a way that I can find them. >>> >>> I hope this is useful. >>> >>> Best Wishes >>> >>> andy >>>> Dear Andy, >>>> (let me re-send my answer from the correct source e-mail address) >>>> >>>> Thank you very much for your efforts of improving English. >>>> >>>> Please kindky review the Annex A for English improving. >>>> Tomorrow I will meet the co-editor over the Skype for further overall >>>> action. >>>> >>>> With best regards, >>>> Hiroaki IKEDA >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> Dear Professor Ikeda, >>>>> >>>>> does the Annex. A. need reviewing for English "improving" ? >>>>> Or should this be left alone as a document from an external source ? >>>>> >>>>> Kind regards >>>>> >>>>> andy >>>>> >>>>>> In the attached I've reviewed the english as requested and made >>>>>> extensive editorial modifications and comments. Almost all of the >>>>>> modifications are entirely editorial with just the odd one or two >>>> where >>>>>> I've suggested a small semantic change. >>>>>> >>>>>> In many cases I wasn't clear what was intended and so I commented to >>>>>> that effect and in some cases suggested several alternatives from >>>> which >>>>>> one can be selected. In some places I could make no sense at all of >>>> a >>>>>> few sentences so there was nothing I could do with it - in those >>>> cases >>>>>> I'm happy to review again and supply english text if some >>>> clarification >>>>>> of meaning can be made and the document marked up in some way so I >>>> can >>>>>> find them. >>>>>> >>>>>> I haven't yet tackled Annex A because I'm not sure of its context >>>> and >>>>>> whether its ok to modify it - if its text taken from some external >>>> study >>>>>> then is it ok to make modifications ? >>>>>> >>>>>> I hope this helps and am happy to look again at clarified parts >>>>>> identified to need a further look and also the Annex if its >>>> appropriate. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers >>>>>> >>>>>> andy >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Cheers >>>>> >>>>> andy >>>>> -- >>>>> __________________ >>>>> Andy Heath >>>>> http://axelafa.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> andy > > > > Cheers > > andy Cheers andy -- __________________ Andy Heath http://axelafa.com