From carson@siggraph.org Tue Nov 19 18:51:32 1996 Received: from siggraph.cgrg.ohio-state.edu (siggraph.cgrg.ohio-state.edu [128.146.18.100]) by dkuug.dk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA01171 for ; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 18:51:30 +0100 Received: from default (carson@siggraph.org) by siggraph.cgrg.ohio-state.edu (8.8.2/941010.52) with SMTP id MAA10597 for ; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 12:51:26 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961119175304.006d730c@siggraph.cgrg.ohio-state.edu> X-Sender: carson@siggraph.cgrg.ohio-state.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 10:53:04 -0700 To: SC24@dkuug.dk From: Steve Carson Subject: JTC1 Re-engineering documents I am separately forwarding to this reflector a set of very recent ( I got them Friday) documents regarding JTC1 re-engineering. The gist of these proposals is to do away with the present SC structure and substitute a set of business groupings. Also, all projects that are not nearly finished and that do not have 5 NBs who are actively participating are proposed for cancellation. I am forwarding as much of this as possible a TXT files. I understand that JTC1 plans to act on these recommendations at its December plenary and that implementation would be phased in over the next 9 months. I believe that we need to have some discussions on this reflector about whether we (SC24) agree with this re-organization. If we don't, then we all need to take immediate actions within our NBs to try and get the proposal rejected or modified. In my estimation, the proposal effectively does away with SC24 by merging us into a group that is already much too large (SC29). As you may know, SC29 already has desires to take over SC24 work in VRML, device interfaces, future graphical APIS, etc. as evidenced ny their current study work on their next generation standards. Also, the JTC1 ad-hoc proposes taking our language binding work and moving that into SC22. This is unworkable for very obvious reasons. I suggest that there would be at least two more effective re-organizations: 1) Group all with interests in presentation of, and interaction with, information together. Leave the coded representations in a separate group since there is little overlap of interest amongst the experts. Thus, I would suggest combining SC24 with parts of SC18 (including WG 8 and WG9), SC22 (the application portability work) and SC29 (I'm unsure of the groups, but it is all those interested in functional and interface specifications and would include MHEG.) 2) Take the areas listed in (1) and combine them with IEC TC100 to form a new TC (JTC 2) with a focus on Multimedia. --------------------------------------------------------- Steve Carson phone: +1-505-521-7399 GSC Associates Inc. fax: +1-505-521-9321 5272 Redman Road e-mail: carson@siggraph.org Las Cruces, NM 88011 USA ---------------------------------------------------------