<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>WG4/WG5 Meetings</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/dmahugh/archive/2009/06/29/wg4-wg5-meetings.aspx</link><description>I’ve just returned last night from a week in Copenhagen, where I attended the SC34 WG4/WG5 meetings that were hosted by Danish Standards.&amp;#160; As usual, it was several days of non-stop document format discussions, in the meetings as well as over breakfast,</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>re: WG4/WG5 Meetings</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/dmahugh/archive/2009/06/29/wg4-wg5-meetings.aspx#9809147</link><pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 05:45:39 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9809147</guid><dc:creator>Carlos</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;In addition to discussing proposed solutions and closing DRs, we discussed at some length two topics ...&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Why don't you throw the beast ( [D]IS 29500 ) and start from scratch again , trying to get an useful standard ( useful == user oriented ) instead of fix the fixes of the fixes...etc, etc ?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Just a suggestion. &lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: WG4/WG5 Meetings</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/dmahugh/archive/2009/06/29/wg4-wg5-meetings.aspx#9819266</link><pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 12:20:08 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9819266</guid><dc:creator>hAl</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Is it likely that MS Office 2010 will include these correcctions andamendsments if agreed upon in august ?&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>re: WG4/WG5 Meetings</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/dmahugh/archive/2009/06/29/wg4-wg5-meetings.aspx#9820052</link><pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 19:09:10 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9820052</guid><dc:creator>dmahugh</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;hAl,&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Actually, the process of reaching agreement on COR1/AM1 will take longer than that. &amp;nbsp;There's a 3-month SC34 ballot, and then a 2-month JTC1 ballot, and there may be some other delays for addressing comments and so on. &amp;nbsp;But as a general concept, yes we're going to try to support these changes ASAP in our implementation. &amp;nbsp;The biggest variable is simply how soon the changes will be in final approved form, and that process will take a while. &amp;nbsp;I'll get more specific after we know more about the timing.&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item></channel></rss>