Subject: Some comments on ISO 14766, WD3

From: Willem Wakker <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 15:21:59 +0100

Here are some comments on ISO 14766 WD3, produced during a few hours
spare time. Maybe some more comment will follow (but don't wait for
it!).

1- before a `real' review of the document can be made, the document
should proofread by an native english standardswriter and be spell
checked. As an example: 1st sentence 2nd paragraph of the scope:
what are "requirements for making POSIX suitable in the culture"??
"options needed of the POSIX standards"?? This really puts the
reader off.

2- the title of the document promises the reader Guidelines.
However, there is no Guideline to be found in the document ...
In the Scope section it is mention that "This TR provides a
guideline .."; is the TR to be seen as one (1) guideline? 
In that case the title should be changed.

3- In TR 10000 a careful distinction is made between a Profile ("a
set of basestandards with options etc ..") and the document in which
the profile is specified (the ISP). TR 10000 provide requirements on
both.
14766 should make the same distinction: there should be a clear
separation between the requirements on the Nationale Profiles (and
Nationale Locales) (i.e. the requirements on the standardsselection,
options etc) and the requirements on the documents in which these
are NPs (NLs) are specified (required chapters, layout etc).

4- Update the references, include TR 10000-3 (all parts of TR 10000
are dated 1998), and bring in the standard format.

5- I would suggest to include in section 4 the Profile definition
from TR10000-1 (with a reference to that document).

6- TR 10000-3 defines the concept of "OSE Profiles" and identifies
POSIX OSE Profiles (like .13 and .10, now ISP 15287-1 and -2).
Strictly speaking: those are POSIX Profiles. Are they intended to
fall under the current definition of 4.1?

7- In 4.2, a POSIX National Profile is defined as a subset of a
POSIX
Profile. What is in the rest of the POSIX Profile of which the POSIX
National Profile is a subset? Or are we talking here about sets of
profiles (all the POSIX Profiles, including the POSIX OSE Profiles
of which the POSIX National Profiles are a subset)? Please clarify
what is intended.

8- Is a POSIX National Locale a Profile? Can it exist without a
POSIX National Profile? Or is it always a (mandatory, optional) part
of a POSIX National Profile?

9- section 4.4 is another horrible example of what is ment under 1.
Please first think about what you want to say, then read a textbook
on how to say it (or copy it from a standard on conformance) and
then write it down.

10- In my view only applications are Internationalized: the access
and/or manipulation of national/cultural dependent information is
done through standardized interfaces; localization is then the act
of selecting one specific locale. I would never call the act of
making an application platform capable of supporting this
functionality "Internationalization" of the application platform
as this is something completely different from Internationalizing
applications.

11- Portability (4.8): sight ....
There is binary portability, source code portability (even people
protability!). What do you mean? Why is it needed here? What is
"(KS)" here and in 4.10, 4.11.

12- ISP (4.11): see definition in TR 10000-1. Please note that an
ISP is a document, not a profile!

13- A distinction is made (for instance in the 1st sentence of 5.1)
between "POSIX [based] [I,i]international Standards" and POSIX.
What is the difference. Please make the terminology consistent.

14- The five `dash-items' in 5.1 are no purposes.

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Willem Wakker					 email: <[email-masked]>
cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc
ACE Consulting bv				  tel: +31 20 6646416
van Eeghenstraat 100				  fax: +31 20 6750389
1071 GL  Amsterdam, The Netherlands		  www: http://www.ace.nl
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee