From alb@sct.gouv.qc.ca Thu Oct 10 21:12:13 1996 Received: from socrate.riq.qc.ca (socrate.riq.qc.ca [199.84.128.1]) by dkuug.dk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA00982; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 21:12:07 +0100 Received: from riq2592 (riq-128-36.riq.qc.ca) by socrate.riq.qc.ca (5.x/SMI-SVR4) id AA02915; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 16:07:15 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 16:07:14 -0400 Message-Id: <9610102007.AA02915@socrate.riq.qc.ca> X-Sender: alb@riq.qc.ca (Unverified) X-Mailer: Eudora Light pour Windows Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit To: brannon@isocs.iso.ch (Keith B.), sc18wg9@dkuug.dk, sc22wg20@dkuug.dk From: "Alain LaBont/e'/" Subject: Personal contribution to ISO/IEC on some problems with WinWord or RTF formats for ISO/IEC electronic document distribution For your information. Dear Mr. Brannon, I already signaled, as an editor, problems that were encountered in SC18/WG9 with incompatibility of different national versions of WinWord format, which is one of the generic formats recommended by JTC1 as an acceptable format. I understand that this generic format was recommended for practical purposes. But on the same ground, I can report the following facts: -ISO/IEC DIS 14755 was produced (in both English and French versions) on a Canadian French version of Win Word 6.0. The document so produced could not be reproduced on paper without errors on the Japanese English and American English versions of WinWord 6.0. This has delayed the work for 3 months. I had to resend documents by air mail to Japan and the USA twice (we believed the files were corrupted) without solving this problem which could not be solved in fact. Only a paper copy could guarantee the integrity of the document (that necessitated local correction of the electronic document). Fortunately we are catching up now, results were excellent on this particular document. The provisional reworking of the DIS in view of producing the final text of the IS in London led to the same problems (fortunately I know what is going on now and can issue the appropriate warnings to the involved secretariats but not all editors are aware of this). I have personally seen that the UK English version of WinWord 6.0 was considering that the page numbering of the Canadian-French-Word-version text is using a wrong parameter (an esoteric message appeared on the screen and on paper the following message appears on each page instead of the page number: "Error! Unknown switch argument". That reproduced the non printability problems of the previous document in Japan and in the USA. I heard from a Japanese delegate that the Japanese version is also incompatible with the English version, at least for WinWord 6 and WinWord 7. We have to be aware of such problems if the recommendations continue to stand and in practice I do not contest these recommendations until we find more universal non-proprietary formats. -I also tried using the RTF format. Now RTF format does not seem to support embedded TT fonts (at least in the Canadian French version) and this feature was essential in reproducing the keyboard symbols that were using an Everson monospacing font (no warning is given though). Such a level of detail is important as editors assume that their document's integrity will be respected with a given format, which is not the case at all here. In fact I am afraid that the RTF files that I sent to you recently via Internet were received corrupted because of this, maybe without your noticing it. I understand that we use RTF format to circumvent the 7-bit Internet SMTP problem but this does not ultimately solve the problem of fonts so perhaps this format is not so appropriate. I do not want to jeopardize JTC1 recommendations but I thought I had the duty to report to ITTF this problem which could considerably affect editor's and ISO work in other areas. Recommendations should be improved *in order to document potential problems*. Perhaps (I believe it is likely in fact) in the future, with the use of ISO/IEC 10646 coding, and with internationalized versions of software (same versions just localized with external files), this kind of problems will vanish. But now it is not yet the case that it does not affect us. Of course the mandatory paper document that has to accompany an electronic file at the involved secretariat is a wise precaution. Alain LaBonté Standards Project editor in ISO/IEC JTC1/SC18/WG9 and ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 cc ISO/IEC JTC1/SC18/WG9 ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20