Subject: Re: Ballot: 96-08-26 N5405 (1996-07-08) Re-engineering

From: "Alain LaBont/e'/" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 15:15:28 -0400

At 10:15 26/08/1996 -0400, Ken Holman wrote:
>Fellow CAC/JTC 1/SC 18 Voting Members (Canadian ballot as input to SC18
reengineering),
>
>For those of you who received document JTC1/SC18 N5405 ... our ballot is
>due today.
>
>Without receiving any comments by the end of today, I will submit "No
>Comments" to SCC.

In answer to question 2 on synergies in reengineering SC18, it seems to me
that, as we now do in Canada for internationalization/localization/national
and international language support issues, that there would be an interest
in joining the efforts of:

SC18/WG9
SC2
SC22/WG20

together. A lot of experts are common to at least the two latter and to a
lesser extent but also on the rise with the first one too.

As a minimum, meetings should be colocated (although it is tough fro private
lifes to have international meetings on more than a week). Ideally forces
should be joined together at least, more than on a liasion basis.

The logic of the big topic of these 3 groups deals with:

Input/Process/Output

SC18/WG9  deals with the first and last object mainly.
SC2       deals with the three superficially but provides the meat of the two 
                other groups.
SC22/WG20 deals with the second one mainly, with incursions in the first and
the 
                last one.

It seems that other countries also do what we do (Denmark, France, Japan,
Sweden). Experts of these subjects in France and Germany also go into the
realm of TC154 (Ergonomy), what seems to fail here in Canada so far.

Alain LaBonté
Québec

cc SC18WG9, SC2, CN2 (FRance), CN18 (France), SC18WG20