OIW/ODA
                                                           92/1202
                       OIW ODA SIG minutes
                       September 22-24, 1992
                       Gaithersburg, MD
                       Submitted by JW Wing

     The meeting was chaired by Jim Wing, Chair, and was attended by
     19 persons plus 4 additional who attended the tutorial only.  After
     administrative information was given, Mr. Wing made announcements
     regarding ODA SIG business:

       1. Technical Liaison Committee (TLC) report
          - SGFS taxonomy issues were discussed.  The issue of who is
            responsible for ISP taxonomy that we had thought belonged
            to ISP owners is to be re-addressed as a regional issue.
       2. Proposed rules for development of regional profiles has been
          reworded and approved.  The changes will be discussed at the
          RWS-CC meeting.

     The major items of business are:

       1. Status on PAGODA #12, DISP Ballots, Taxonomy, FOD36 editing,
          and Image application activities.
       2. Object ID Registry final update.
       3. Election of officers
          - Mr. Wing has resigned as Chair in a letter to Tim Boland.

     After contributions to the meeting were distributed, a draft agenda
     for the meeting was presented which was essentially identical to
     the draft agenda proposed in the meeting notice.  This agenda was
     approved.

     The minutes of the June 1992 meeting in Gaithersburg were
     approved.


     Technical Activities
     --------------------

     In plenary session on Tuesday, Sept 20, 1992, status reports on work
     efforts of the SIG were given by Jim Wing, Frank Spielman, and Jon
     Stewart.  The areas covered by the reports were:

       1. PAGODA #12 - this meeting is to be held in Dallas, TX, during the
          week of October 19-23, 1992.  The meeting room is the the Austin
          Room at IBM's Southlake facility located near D/FW airport.  Maps
          and information sheets are available, and a meeting notice was
          distributed with the Sept OIW ODA SIG meeting notice mailed in
          August 1992.  Agenda items include:
          - ISR proforma and requirements progression.
          - Extensions to FOD26.
          - Image DAP progression.
          - Abstract Test Suite progression.


                          Minutes                    2


       2. DISP Ballot Resolution meeting update - the formal output from
          this meeting was received, reviewed and comments returned.  The
          submission of this material, that is, the formal disposition of
          comments is submitted to SGFS.  The final text for the ISPs is
          progressing, but approximately one month behind schedule.

       3. FODxx Editing - the editors meeting was held in Tokyo on July
          23-24, 1992.  The final editing instructions and editorial
          changes were agreed upon and a schedule set that would provide
          final texts to ISO by early September.  It now looks like early
          October is possible.

       4. Taxonomy Status - the SGFS reviewed the PAGODA 10 proposal for
          taxonomy changes to the TR10000 document and responded with
          several requests for clarification:
          a) FOD11, FOD26, and FOD36 are being published, won't this change
             affect the publication?
          b) SGFS does not agree with the use of "version".
          c) SGFS is not clear on the relationship of the proposed initial
             digit and the version number.
          d) SGFS is not clear on the need for a different numbering
             scheme.
          e) SGFS is not clear that taxonomy identifier titles are correct.

       It was decided to submit the SGFS taxonomy issue to the RWS-CC to
       obtain a clarification of the intent of SGFS regarding taxonomy.  If
       the SGFS has given responsibility to the ISP owners to determine the
       subfields of the taxonomy beyond "FOD" in this case, then the
       raising of multiple questions concerning the taxonomy provided by
       the responsible groups is inappropriate.  If the SGFS intends to
       review the taxonomy provided in this kind of detail, it should provide
       representatives to the harmonization groups such as PAGODA.

     Frank Spielman, NIST, presented the status of ongoing work for the
     Image Applications subgroup and identified the work for the group
     during the meetings.

     Frank Spielman also submitted an updated paper describing the object
     identifier assignment by the ODA SIG as approved at the June meeting.

     The ODA tutorial consisted of presentation and discussion led by
     Jon Stewart, DEC, on SGML/ODA compatibility issues and DTD/DAP
     comparisons.

     On Wednesday the ODA SIG subgroups (Text Processing, Image
     Applications, and Interoperability) met in separate meetings.
     The minutes of the subgroup meetings are appended to the end of
     these minutes.

     The ODA SIG met again Thursday in plenary session to consider the
     output of the working subgroups and other business.



                          Minutes                    3

     The Image applications subgroup presented five motions to be
     presented at the OIW plenary.  After presentation and discussion,
     the following were voted:

       1) Make editorial changes to Stable Agreements Part 23, ODA Raster
          DAP.  These changes were the result of a review by DoD and CALS
          Industry Steering Group (yes=6, no=0, abstain=0).
       2) Make technical editorial changes to Stable Agreements Part 23,
          ODA Raster DAP to allow specification of the bit order within
          byte for T.4/T.6 encoded data as either "up" or "down" sequence.
          This involves inserting the use of new object identifiers that
          are specified in the bit order amendment to T.417 : ISO 8613-7.
          (yes=6, no=0, abstain=0).
       3) Make technical editorial changes to Working Agreements Part 22,
          ODA Image DAP to allow specification of the bit order within
          byte for T.4/T.6 encoded data as either "up" or "down" sequence.
          This involves inserting the use of new object identifiers that
          are specified in the bit order amendment to T.417 : ISO 8613-7.
          Include a note that this is intended to change to Stable
          Agreements in Dec 1992. (yes=6, no=0, abstain=0).
       4) Liaison to PAGODA submitting the following contributions on
          behalf of OIW:
          a) OIW position on Raster and Image DAP issues
          b) ODA Raster DAP revised
          c) ODA Image DAP revised
          d) Add tiled raster content to future revised FOD36
          e) Add pel path / line direction to future revised FOD26
          f) Requirements for specifying T.4 / T.6 bit order (information)
          (yes=6, no=0, abstain=0).

     The Text Processing subgroup presented motions to be presented at the
     OIW plenary.  After presentation and discussion the following were
     voted:

       1) Liaison to AOW with copies to EWOS and CCITT stating that we
          support their work on abstract test cases and promising a review
          by the interoperability subgroup following the December 1992
          meeting. (yes=6, no=0, abstain=0).
       2) Liaison to PAGODA submitting the following contributions on
          behalf of OIW:
          a) ISR document revised to PAGODA 11 output.
          b) ISR proforma issues
          c) Discussion of proposals to enhance FOD26.
          d) Proposal to enhance FOD26 (FOD26E)
          e) Conformance testing position
          f) Comments on the use of itemisation
          g) Comments on the use of offset
          h) Position on ISR for FOD36 alternative to FOD26E
          (vote on a-h was: yes=7, no=0, abstain=0).
          i) Response to SGFS comments on taxonomy
          (vote on i only: yes=5, no=0, abstain=0).
       4) Liaison to EWOS, AOW, and CCITT submitting the editting
          instructions for FOD26 that enhance the functionality of FOD26.
          (yes=7, no=0, abstain=0).


                          Minutes                    4



     Other business included:

       1. Discussion of plans for PAGODA #12 and review the proposed
          agenda.
       2. The PAGODA #12 delegation was selected and approved as
          follows:
          Jim Wing, IBM US, head of delegation
          Patrick Stephens, DEC
          Rick Pond, IBM Canada
          Frank Spielman, NIST
          (yes=7, no=0, abstain=0)
       3. Election of officers was discussed.  The discussion centered
          around possible ways of realigning the ODA SIG procedures to
          share the responsibilities.  Both a Chair and a Secretary are
          needed.  Current subgroup chairs indicated a willingness to
          continue their responsibilities.  Jon Stewart agreed to take
          responsibility for the tutorial sessions.  Jon also agreed to
          check with his DEC to determine if they would support him in
          the Chair position.  Michelle Oh, Mitre, agreed to check with
          her management to determine if they will support her acceptance
          of the Secretary position.  No votes were taken.
       4. Reminder of the need to review the charter and of future plans
          including updates of the planning charts.

     Future meetings are:
       PAGODA 12 in Dallas, Texas, October 19-23, 1992.
       The next OIW ODA SIG meeting is Dec 15, 1992, in Gaithersburg,
       Maryland, USA.


                          Minutes                    5

     ==================================================================

                    Text Processing Subgroup Report
                        Submitted by J. Wing

     The Text Processing subgroup met Wednesday, Sept 23, 1992, during the
     OSI Implementors Workshop in Gaithersburg, MD.

     Attendees were:
        Michelle Oh, MITRE
        Joe Middleton, DWA
        Harold Shinsato, XEROX
        Patrick Stephens, DEC
        Jim Wing, IBM USA

     The Text Processing subgroup:

      - Reviewed and reaffirmed the proposed OIW Implementation
        Support Requirements (ISR) document based on PAGODA #11 agreements.
        * ISR editor (J. Wing) provided the updated document in the
          Working Agreements.
        * Future work on ISR includes incorporating changes due to changes
          in the DAPs currently occurring, especially the geometric
          graphics changes.

      - Reviewed SGFS comments and request for clarifications.  It was
        pointed out that the supporting documentation was apparently
        not used in reaching the decision to request clarification, and
        that some of the suggestions (questions) seemed to indicate a
        misunderstanding of the ideas behind the proposals.  It was
        decided to submit a contribution to PAGODA 12.

      - Reviewed, modified and approved the contributions to PAGODA 12 as
        prepared by J. Wing.
        * W1 OIW Level 2 ODA DAP Implementation Support Requirements
          document.  The liaison OIW/ODA 92/0923 to EWOS, AOW and CCITT is
          to be included as part of the ISR contribution.
        * W2 Issues on ISR proforma revised to reflect OIW ODA SIG
          positions on terminology and database.
        * W3 Discussion of FOD26 Enhancements.  This document is
          historical, in that it specifies the original intent of OIW ODA
          SIG with regard to enhancements to FOD26.
        * W4 FOD26E, Enhancements to FOD26.  This document is a proposal
          for changes to the FOD26 document to provide minimum
          capabilities for simple word processing products.  The liaison
          OIW/ODA 92/0911 to AOW, EWOS, and CCITT submitting this document
          for review and summarizing the changes is to be included.
        * W5 Conformance testing.  This document states the OIW ODA SIG
          positions relative to testing issues.
        * W6 and W7 are responses to comments on Itemisation and Offset.
          These are historical in nature, and represent OIW ODA SIG
          positions on usage of these ODA attributes.  Both of these
          contributions were updated to reflect current information.


                          Minutes                    6

        * The contribution W8 referred to a Proposal for Numbering Schemes
          which we decided to withdraw.  In its place, the OIW ODA SIG
          position on "ISR for FOD36 as a replacement for the proposal on
          FOD26E" will be submitted stating that an ISR for FOD36 implies
          multiple ISRs, is confusing to the user who expects support of
          FOD36 but gets little more than FOD26, and is difficult for the
          vendors to implement.  P. Stephens and J. Wing will provide the
          text for this contribution.
        * Another contribution, W9, is to be provided by J. Wing to
          respond to the SGFS requests for clarification on DAP taxonomy.
        (The vote on these contributions was unanimous.)

      - Reviewed submissions from AOW on test cases for FOD11 and FOD36.
        o Prepared a liaison to EWOS, AOW, and CCITT indicating our
          support of this work effort and that the interoperability
          subgroup has indicated a willingness to review the information
          and provide comments following the Dec OIW ODA SIG meeting.
        (The vote on this liaison was unanimous.)

      - Action items:
        * Convert ASCII flat file form of FOD26E into WordPerfect 5.1
          for a working agreements document - Wing
        * Create Level 2 ISR in WordPerfect 5.1.
        * Create FOD36 ISR - Wing
        * Obtain new part in working agreeements for new DAP - Wing
          This will wait until after PAGODA 12.


                          Minutes                    7

     ==================================================================

                     ODA SIG Image Applications Subgroup
                     Minutes of September 22-24 Meeting
                         Submitted by Frank Spielman

      The Image Applications Subgroup of the ODA SIG met on Wednesday,
      September 23, 1992.

      Attendees were:
           Alan Peltzman, DISA
           Rick Pond, IBM Canada
           Les Potter, PRC
           Annette Shuford, Navy/DTMB
           Frank Spielman, NIST

      The subgroup reviewed comments on the ODA Raster DAP (Stable
      Agreements) that were submitted by DoD/CALS Industry Steering Group
      (OIW/ODA 92/0915).  These comments were the result of an extensive
      review of the draft MIL-R-28002B which will includes the ODA Raster
      DAP as an appendix.  All of the comments except one on bit order
      were editorial.  The subgroup reviewed each comment deciding upon
      the ODA SIG action to take (accept, reject, modify and accept).
      The technical change was rejected because it overlapped with a
      separate proposal addressing bit order.  The subgroup then approved
      these actions to make the editorial revisions to the ODA Raster DAP
      in the Stable Agreements.  The actions are documented in OIW/ODA
      92/XXXX.  The editorial revisions will also need to be made to the
      ODA Image DAP but will be made at the December meeting.  (5-0-0)

      The subgroup then reviewed the technical proposal (OIW/ODA 92/916)
      concerning the bit order of CCITT T.4/T.6 encoded data.  It
      proposed removing the restrictions in the Raster/Image DAPs that
      require the bit order of T.4/T.6 encoded data to be in the up
      order, that is, the least significant bit (LSB) to most signifcant
      bit (MSB) order.  Secondly, it proposed adding object identifier
      values to the DAPs for "type of coding" and "tile types" that
      support both bit order directions, that is, also support down order
      which is the MSB to LSB order.  This revision will allow DoD to use
      the down order and AIIM to use either bit order.  The proposal to
      make this revision in the Stable Agreements ODA Raster DAP was
      approved (5-0-0).  The specific changes are also documented in
      OIW/ODA 92/XXXX (page 26, para 8.3).  A fall back position was also
      approved (5-0-0) to change the Working Agreements ODA Raster DAP in
      the case that the OIW plenary did not approve the technical errata
      in the Stable Agreements.

      A proposal was approved to make the bit order revision in the
      Working Agreements ODA Image DAP adding a note that the intent is
      to move the revision to Stable Agreements in December 1992.  (5-0-
      0)

      During the discussion of bit order, a defect was identified in the
      bit order mapping amendment to ISO 8613-7 (OIW/ODA 92/931).  Frank
      Spielman will prepare a defect report and send to Herman Silbiger,
      CCITT editor.


                          Minutes                    8


      The subgroup then discussed image applications contributions to be
      taken to PAGODA #12 in October.  The subgroup approved the
      following: (1) OIW Position on Issues, (2) ODA Image DAP, (3) ODA
      Raster DAP, (4) Adding Tiled Raster Content to Future FOD 36, (5)
      Adding Pel Path and Line Progression to Future FOD 26, and (6)
      Information on OIW Requirements for Bit Order.  The first five are
      updates of contributions previously approved (OIW/ODA 92/0931 &
      0611), only the sixth one is a new contribution.  (5-0-0)

      The subgroup then discussed the taxonomy concerns raised by SGFS
      (OIW/ODA 92/0918).  It is the subgroup's position that no further
      changes should be made and that further clarification on the OIW
      position should be forwarded.

      The ODA Raster DAP ISR (OIW/ODA 92/0350) was briefly discussed but
      there was not enough time remaining to discuss in detail or to take
      any actions.

      At the ODA SIG plenary on September 24, each of the above proposals
      was presented and approve (6-0-0 on each proposal).



                          Minutes                    9

     ==================================================================

                    ODA SIG Interoperability Subgroup
                       Minutes of Sept 23 Meeting
                        Submitted by Jon Stewart


     Attendees were:

        Jon Stewart, Chair (DEC Contractor)
        Patrick Stephens, DEC
        Harold Shinsato, XEROX
        MacFarland Hale, Mitre
        Joanna Vanderwilt, Consultant

     Jon Stewart updated the group on the status of funding for the ODA
     Interoperability Testing Project, the relationship to OSINET as a
     subproject, and the OSINET contract with Paul Pedersen, Independent
     ODA Consultant in Montreal, Canada.

     Startup funding of $10,000 (DEC, Boeing) has been paid to OSINET;
     XEROX has a $5,000 payment in the works; and Dept of Communications,
     Canada, has agreed to pay $5,000 directly to Paul Pedersen in
     support of the project.  With this $20,000 in funding, the project
     should be able to continue through January 31, 1993, producing the
     following results:

        1 A technical report detailing the methodology utilized for ODA
          Interoperability testing.  Currently in draft, this document
          will be circulated by OSINET, probably by 11/30/92.

        2 A complete analysis of the "abstract effects" (AE's) represented
          in a small set (10-20) of key text documents (KTD's).

        3 A detailed explanation of the relationship of the AEs in the KTDs
          to "observable effects" (OE's) perceived by the user when
          processing ODA documents with current products.

        4 Test scenarios (in the form of verbal scripts) for utilizing the
          KTDs in "evaluating" the Implementation Under Test (IUT's).

        5 Criteria for measuring the degree to which OEs faithfully
          "reproduce" the intent of the document originator (as expressed
          by the AEs in the document).



                          Minutes                    10

     Given completion of the above steps, it will then be possible for
     vendors who are members of OSINET to register ODA Interoperability
     test results in the OSINET database.  Although of interest to the
     members of the project, it will NOT be possible to accomplish the
     following objectives in this first (and we hope not the last) phase of
     the project:

        1 Complete relationship of the other Interoperability or datastream
          conformance testing to this work.  We will look at ISRs, ATCs and
          any "real document" testing going on, BUT not necessarily conform
          to or utilize this work.

        2 Preparation of an exhaustive test suite for any particular ISP
          (ie, DAP and ISR).

        3 Evaluation of and/or "marking" of any particular product.

     We believe this ODA Interoperability testing project will be useful in
     the more general scope of compound document interchange and
     processing, whether that is based on formal standards, such as ODA or
     SGML, or one of the proprietary defacto standards.  With that intent,
     we hope to eventually produce an exhaustive analysis of this subject -
     that is, "interoperability" between different compound document
     processing systems.