Re: ISO/IEC standardization of EPUB: Procedure

2017-05-09 18:33 GMT+09:00 Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>:

> As a long-time ISO person, let me add a few more key pieces of information
> to this thread.
>
>
>
> 1.       An ISO TS has a maximum life of 6 years – after which it MUST
> either become an IS _*OR*_ it will be withdrawn.  The 6 years is
> determined by 2 sets of “3 year systematic reviews”.  Since 30135 is dated
> 2014, it should be up for systematic review this year.  That would be the
> perfect time to move from TS->IS.
>

Actually, a maximum life of 6 years is just a recommendation.  There are no
limits.
See "2.9.1 Introduction" in ISO/IEC Directives Part 1 and Consolidated ISO
Supplement - 2017 (8th edition)
<https://www.iso.org/sites/directives/2017/consolidated/index.xhtml>

2.       Upgrading a TS to an IS is a well defined process, though as noted
> it would require going through the “full” ISO process.  More importantly,
> however, it would also mean REPLACING the existing document – so that the
> current document for 3.0 would no longer be available.  If the goal is to
> have both currently available, then the process would be to “upgrade” the
> existing 3.0 to IS AND THEN create a new document/IS that would be 3.1.
> (NOTE: you can’t mix and match TS and IS with the same numbering)
>

Yes.  SC34/JWG7 can request ITTF to keep both IS versions
in the catalog.

> 3.       Another issue for consideration is that any new document through
> the standard process (either TS or IS) MUST use the standard ISO template
> and language.  That basically means a good chunk of the current spec would
> need to be rewritten and reformatted to ISO standards (eg. Word as the
> authoring environment, MUST->SHALL, etc. )
>
If we would like to create an IS, I believe that we are required to use the
standard ISO template and language.  But If we simply revise an existing
International Standard  by adding errata and amendments and publish a
revision, we are not required to use  the standard ISO template and
language.  This is what SC34/WG4 has done several times.

Regards,
Makoto

>
>
> Hope that helps.  If anyone has additional questions about ISO process,
> don’t hesistate to ask.
>
>
>
> Leonard
>
>
>
> *From: *Bill McCoy <bmccoy@w3.org>
> *Organization: *W3C
> *Date: *Tuesday, May 9, 2017 at 2:47 AM
> *To: *'MURATA Makoto' <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>, "
> public-publishingbg@w3.org" <public-publishingbg@w3.org>
> *Subject: *RE: ISO/IEC standardization of EPUB: Procedure
> *Resent-From: *<public-publishingbg@w3.org>
> *Resent-Date: *Tuesday, May 9, 2017 at 2:47 AM
>
>
>
> Dear Makoto, thank you very much for the detailed information.
>
>
> So for PBG folks, my take is the following
>
>
>
> a)       While it would be possible in principle to work with S. Korea to
> upgrade EPUB 3 from TS (Technical Specification) to IS (International
> Standard), and in the process could upgrade from 3.0 to 3.1, this would be
> considerable work and presents some obstacles since some of the dependent
> W3C specifications normatively referenced by EPUB 3.1 and earlier revisions
> are not themselves final Recommendations but only Candidates
> Recommendations or even Working Drafts. With everything else we have on our
> collective plate I can’t recommend that we pursue it at this time.
>
>
>
> b)       As Makoto points out it would be possible to work with S. Korea
> and SC34 to upgrade the current EPUB 3.0 TS to 3.1 but not through “fast
> track” but the normal procedure. I don’t know that this would significantly
> change the effort required for this , mainly to process incoming errata
> reports, even if the only result is that for “righteous” errata we commit
> to addressing in a future revision (as IDPF agreed to do for 3.0, and did
> so in 3.0.1) but it would certainly increase the risk that it would not be
> successful due to objections and would probably be at least somewhat more
> hassle overall. I think PBG members should consider, and opine about if not
> in tomorrow’s call then in the near future, how significant they see the
> benefits of such an upgrade in terms of for example supporting
> accessibility mandates specifying EPUB 3. I have not heard anything
> specific about this and perhaps it could be ‘good enough” for a11y mandates
> that need an ISO reference to specify TS 30135 with a note, as appropriate,
> recommending use of EPUB 3.1 as the current version. I don’t think we
> should necessarily forbid use of EPUB 3.0 particularly as the modular EPUB
> Accessibility specification element of EPUB 3.1 was designed to apply to
> EPUB 3.0 as well later (and hopefully future) revisions. But that is just
> my opinion. If PBG thinks it Is a high priority we could then discuss
> further with EPUB 3 CG and other stakeholders. But if PbG doesn’t think it
> is a high priority we probably should table it for now (which might mean
> forever as far as EPUB 3 family is concerned, although a future EPUB 4 that
> is a W3C Recommendation could use the W3C PAS process to become a full IS).
>
>
>
> --Bill
>
>
>
> *From:* eb2mmrt@gmail.com [mailto:eb2mmrt@gmail.com] * On Behalf Of *MURATA
> Makoto
> *Sent:* Sunday, May 7, 2017 8:31 PM
> *To:* public-publishingbg@w3.org
> *Subject:* ISO/IEC standardization of EPUB: Procedure
>
>
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
>
>
> I plan to send a sequence of e-mails about this topic.  This first
>
> e-mail is about procedures.  The ISO/IEC JTC1 SC34 secretariat
>
> checked the content of this e-mail.
>
>
>
> 1) ISO/IEC TS 30135
>
>
>
> The combination of EPUB 3.0 and FXL has been published as
>
> ISO/IEC Technical Specification 30135-1 to -7.  They were
>
> submitted by Korea as Draft Technical Specifications using
>
> the fast-track procedure.
>
>
>
> 2) Fast-track procedure
>
>
>
> Member bodies (including Korea) are able to submit their national
>
> standards as draft international standards (DISs).  Fast-tracked DISs
>
> are voted only once for acceptance as International Standards.
>
>
>
> It is not impossible for Korea to adopt EPUB 3.0.1 or 3.1 as national
>
> standards and then submit it as a Draft International Standards.
>
>
>
> Member bodies were allowed to submit Draft Technical Specifications,
>
> but they are no longer allowed to so due to recent changes to ISO/IEC
>
> directives.  Thus, Korea cannot submit EPUB 3.0.1 or 3.1 as Draft
>
> Technical Specifications.
>
>
>
> 3) PAS procedure
>
>
>
> PAS submitters (including W3C) are able to submit recommendations as
>
> draft international standards (DISs).  PAS-submitted DISs are voted
>
> only once for acceptance as International Standards.  No existing
>
> versions of EPUB are W3C recommendations.  Thus, W3C is
>
> not allowed to submit EPUB3 as draft international standards.
>
>
>
> There has been no PAS process for draft technical specifications.
>
> Thus, W3C is not allowed to submit EPUB3 as draft technical
>
> specifications.
>
>
>
> 4) Normal procedure
>
>
>
> It is possible to use the normal process for revising ISO/IEC 30135 in
>
> sync with EPUB 3.0.1 or 3.1.  ODF 1.1 (OASIS standard) was standardized
>
> in ISO/IEC SC34/WG6 in this manner.  Associating Schemas with XML
>
> documents 1.0 (W3C Working Group Note) was also standardized in
>
> ISO/IEC SC34/WG1 in this manner.  Although the normal procedure
>
> requires more than one ballot, it is not so slow as long as no
>
> oppositions are supported by other member bodies.
>
>
>
> https://www.w3.org/TR/2011/NOTE-xml-model-20110811/
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2F2011%2FNOTE-xml-model-20110811%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C75d66267c9774cda2a0308d49675116d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636298876934080670&sdata=c%2F9nJ6BE1kksBzWXo8UCN0gh7%2BYDul%2BTNdUyCvTAP%2Fw%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
> What is more, SC34 has already made a resolution for using the normal
>
> procedure for revising ISO/IEC TS 30135.
>
>
>
>   Resolution 9: Revision of ISO/IEC TS 30135: 2014, Information technology
> -- Digital
>
>   publishing -- EPUB3 (all parts)
>
>
>
>   SC 34 creates sub-projects for a revision of TS 30135 (all parts) and
>
>   assigns them to JWG 7 for development. The revision is to address the
>
>   latest EPUB3 revision (3.0.1), in which parts 2 and 7 are merged. SC
>
>   34 instructs its Secretariat to take the necessary action to obtain
>
>   JTC 1 endorsement in accordance with JTC 1 Supplement 2.1.5.4.
>
>
>
> 5) Superseding
>
>
>
> No matter which process is used for standardizing EPUB 3.0.1 or 3.1 in
>
> ISO/IEC, the current version, ISO/IEC 30135:2014 (EPUB 3.0 and FXL),
>
> will disappear from the ISO/IEC catalog.
>
>
>
> It is not completely impossible to have more than one editions in the
>
> ISO/IEC catalog.  In fact, ODF 1.0 (including 1.1) and 1.2 are both
>
> in the catalog as ISO/IEC 26300:2006 and ISO/IEC 26300:2015.  But
>
> this is a special case.  In the case of OOXML (ISO/IEC 29500), only
>
> the latest edition is in the catalog.  Since EPUB 3.0 is an ISO/IEC
>
> [image: mage removed by sender.]
>
> Technical Specification rather than an International Standard, I think
>
> that there are slim chances.
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34/WG4 Convenor
>
> Head of Delegation of the Japanese SC34 mirror
> Makoto
>



-- 

Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake

Makoto