You wrote:
>> I agree with Emmanuel, this is a TECHNICAL CHANGE, which is not
>> completely clarified IMHO.
>> In addition, the clarification about ContentAvailable event seems to be
>> again a TECHNICAL CHANGE.
>For some people it might be a technical change, for others it is a
>clarification.
We cannot live with such ambiguity.
If such a situation (people not agreeing on its classification) can happen,
then this means that someone (the editor?) should propose (and get
agreement on) a definition that allows to discriminate changes from
clarifications.
A straightforward one is clarification = no change of intended meaning,
no change needed in current (conforming) engines or applications; otherwise =
technical change.
Remember, ISO makes a difference between Corrigendum (removing bugs
and making clarifications) and Amendment (technical changes), and
the mandate of the MTF (as given by WG12) is to prepare text for a Corrigendum.
As many experts already emphasised it, introducing changes at this point in
time, given the raising interest in MHEG-5, would be extremely damaging.
The building is still fragile so "Caution" should be the keyword.
Andreas, as the nominated editor/rapporteur of this task force (together with Klaus)
I think it is your responsibility to avoid any confusion
and make sure such damage does not happen.
Best regards
Xavier