The 4th Study Meeting on the Operation of Character Requirements in local governments Information Systems

Overview

Date and Time: Friday, September 29, 2023 (2023) from 13:00 to 15:00
Location: All town and village halls and online conferences
Agenda:
1. Opening
2. Agenda
  1. Review of the Third Review Meeting
  2. Draft "Standard Specifications for Data Requirements and Cooperation Requirements [Version 3.0]"
  3. Disclosure of Related Materials, etc. Related to Character Requirements
  4. Demonstration projects Using Identification Support Tool (Beta Version)
  5. Extension of the Review Board
3. Other
4. Adjournment

Materials

Relevant policies

Unification and standardization of core business systems in local governments

Summary of proceedings

Date

Friday, September 29, 2023 (2023), from 13:00 to 15:00

Location

National Town and Village Hall Online

Attendees

*Honorific titles omitted

Chairman

Masahiko Shoji (Professor, Faculty of Sociology, Musashi University)

Members

Atsushi Ogino (Expert, local governments Information Systems Organization)
Tatsuo Kobayashi (Chairman of the Character Information Technology Promotion Council)
Shuji Goto (President and Representative Director, area Information Technology Laboratory Co., Ltd.
Hiroyuki Sasahara, Professor, Waseda Daigaku. Shakai Kagakubu
Nobuaki Hayashi (Senior Manager, Usuki City Health Health Division)
Satoshi Harada (Kyoto Sangyo 21 Promotion of DX Supervisor and CISO)

Associate member

Masahiro Kamanaka (INES Corporation)
Masanori FUJINO (NEC Corporation)
Hiroaki Aoki (Hitachi Systems, Ltd.)
Representative: Eisuke Shikata (Fujitsu Japan Limited)
Attended on behalf of Akira Mukai (FUJIFILM System Service Co., Ltd.)
Yuki Hayase (Ryobi Systems Co., Ltd.)
Masakazu Yoshida (RYOMO SYSTEMS CO.,LTD.)

Observer

Yutaka Maruo (Assistant Director of the Local Digital Platform Planning Office Division, Resident Systems Division, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications Autonomous Administrative Bureau)
Masanori Takashi Osanai (Deputy Director of the Local Digital Platform Planning Office Division, Population Systems Division, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications Autonomous Administrative Bureau)
Kuniaki Tanahashi (Assistant Director of the Management Division, Electoral Department, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications Local Government Bureau)
Dan UCHIYAMA (Section Chief of the Management Division, Election Department, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications Autonomous Administrative Bureau)
Shohei Yamada (Assistant Director of the Digitization Promotion Office, Planning Division, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications Autonomous Tax Bureau)
Hiroshi Aono (Section Head of the Digitization Promotion Office, Planning Division, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications Autonomous Tax Bureau)
Takuya Hazama (Section Chief of the First Civil Affairs Division, Civil Affairs Bureau, Ministry of
Takahiro Tanaka (First Civil Affairs Division, Civil Affairs Bureau)
Mizuki Natori (Assistant Director of the Study Support and Teaching Materials Division, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) Elementary and Secondary education Bureau)
Tomohiro Ohtani (Section Head of the Enrollment Support Section, Educational Support and Teaching Materials Division, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) Elementary and Secondary education Bureau)
Hiroomi Sunose (Assistant to the Director of the Office of Counselor in Charge of Information Systems of the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare

Agenda

Review of the Third Review Meeting
Draft "Standard Specifications for Data Requirements and Cooperation Requirements [Version 3.0]"
Disclosure of Related Materials, etc. Related to Character Requirements
Demonstration projects Using Identification Support Tool (Beta Version)
Extension of the Review Board
Other

Proceedings

At the 4th meeting, the MOJ reviewed the 3rd Study Group and reported that the replacement of character sets in the "Standard Specifications for Data Requirements and Cooperation Requirements" for family registry Affairs should be carefully advanced while respecting the opinions of the people, and that it is expected to take time to respond, including from a technical perspective.
The Secretariat provided explanations based on Material 1 regarding "Proposal for Standard Specifications for Data Requirements and Cooperation Requirements [Version 3.0]," "Disclosure of Related Materials, etc. Related to Character Requirements," "demonstration projects Using an Identification Support Tool (Beta Version)," and "Extension of the Review Meeting."

Handout

Material 1: Materials of the Study Meeting on the Operation of Character Requirements in local governments Information Systems
Material 2: Outline of the Review Meeting on the Operation of Character Requirements in local governments Information Systems

Question and

Member: Document 1, I think that the discussions up to now have been well reflected.

There is only one point. On page 11, after *, there is an explanation about "external character," and in the third line, there is "character code." I think it is better to change it to "character set." If you use the word code, you may be misled by Unicode, so I think it is more appropriate to use the word character set.

Member: I think you've hit the mark, but strictly speaking, this is a Unique identifier in the character set defined by Digital Agency.

In this case, the name itself is important, and the relationship with the code is not important. Therefore, if the character codes are difficult to understand, I think there is no problem if the text is given as a separate "character name" (limited to one designated by Digital Agency) for the external characters.

Secretariat: We would like to change it to "character name".

Associate Member: Document 1, it says, "The fonts created in Digital Agency are used as reference fonts, but we will consider a unified font file." Please tell us the details of this.

In the previous Study Group, there was a discussion that two font files should be used in order to reduce the number of Issue standard characters to about 70000 characters. However, I believe that there was also a direction that consideration would be given to using one font file in the future as the administrative operation of font files.

Secretariat: It is recognized that it is necessary to consider the reference font of one administrative operation standard character in the future.

However, I am sorry to say that there are still various proposals at this point in time regarding how to unify them and what kind of specific system to advance them, and Digital Agency has not been able to collect all the proposals. I believe that this issue must be advanced based on various needs and technical Issue.

We have started discussions in the working team consisting of associate members, but we would like to continue to create a forum for discussions in such a way, and at this point, we cannot answer the direction that has been decided.

Associate Member: Even if two font files are used, I think Issue was mentioned. I would like to continue the discussion at the working team.

Member: , I would like to strongly request that it be unified into one font file. If there are characters that are not actually used, they can be removed and treated as a reference file, so I would like to proceed with validation to see if there are any practical problems. I would like to consider providing it as one font file as soon as possible.

Secretariat: Digital Agency We would like to organize and present what we can as soon as possible.

Associate Member: What we are worried about from the vendor's point of view is the schedule.
We are about to release standard compliance system as a package, so I would like to know what will happen to font files, when will it be unified, and when will it be considered.

Secretariat: . Digital Agency would like to consider what kind of way to proceed and the schedule as a set, so please give us some more time.

In addition, as an interim measure, we explained at the previous review meeting that we would set a time for system response. While there is an interim measure, existing external characters can be used on the database, so it will be possible to respond without using the font file this time or the font file of the new administrative operation standard characters. However, when the interim measure is completed, the correspondence of the font file is an unavoidable problem. We would like you to consider the plan of the package, etc. while using the interim measure well.

Associate Member: Is it correct to understand that you are saying that we will not be able to make it in time for the twenty twenty-five, so we would like you to overcome the situation with transitional measures during that period?

Secretariat: At present, we are considering the end of the next fiscal year, but we would like each company to decide that one of the options is to overcome the situation with transitional measures.

Associate Member: What we are worried about is the form. Since the form is made so that the font name is specified for each object, when the existing font is used as an interim measure, different fonts are used for each local government, so that fitting work occurs for each local government.

After that, when the unified font comes out, the release for the unified font will occur again. Since it will be necessary to respond again and there will be a risk due to the font switching error, I asked you a question. I would like to proceed while considering on my own until the twenty twenty-five.

Member: , there are parts with different properties for each character set, so we believe that there are points that need to be noted.

Member: As we discussed earlier, what matters is the character set.

Once the character sets are determined, in relation to each other, the classification method, which I call character classification granularity, changes. Unicode has Unicode rules, and JIS codes have JIS code rules. Naturally, family registry has rules for distinguishing characters in the family registry system actually used, such as family registry characters. This is the same for both the character information infrastructure and administrative operation standard characters.

It is pointed out that the transition between so-called character sets is different in nature and, in fact, it is very difficult.

Member: using the demonstration projects Identification Support Tool (beta version), we asked 200 local government to cooperate in identifying the characters managed by the system to be standardized and the family registry system characters.

Therefore, we will ask for the cooperation of 3 local government in considering the treatment of the characters that could not be identified. Is 3 local government enough? Even if we give the characters that could not be identified to 3 local government, will it not be said, "This is not used in our local government?"

Secretariat: We were sorry for the insufficient explanation. What we would like to do validation in this demonstration projects is not to list up such a large number of characters that could not be identified, but to consider how to handle each pattern, for example, if the character is not used in standard compliance system, how to handle it. This is the image of 3 local government.

Member: This initiative is exactly what I think "I wanted this kind of thing to be done." I have high expectations for it because it will challenge what has not been done until now. In particular, although it will be discussed in the future, considering the international standardization, this work of pattern classification will be particularly important and will become important. In addition, on pages 22 and 23, there is a pattern handling of characters that could not be identified. Does the meaning of the phrase "identification is unnecessary" mean that it can be left as it is? In short, is it correct to understand that characters that could not be identified but are allowed under the system need to be brought into the international standard?

Secretariat: I would like to decide the details of how to handle it at the working group (tentative), but I would like to divide it into cases first.

Member: In that case, I imagine that the division will be discussed at the working group (tentative), but when it is brought to the international standard, it will be a discussion of where to bring it.

One point that I would like to see used as a reference in future discussions is that one is Chinese characters and the other is so-called hentai kana, which is sometimes seen in administrative operation standard characters. In addition, what the members also have trouble with is that it is neither Chinese characters nor kana, and although it is not a character, it seems to be used in the same form as a character to identify individuals or houses.

For example, the family crest of a warlord in the Warring States period is an identifier. It is similar to that, and so is a racial character with a very low literacy rate. In short, I think it will be easier later if you can separate what is not a character but is necessary to identify an individual or a group.

Secretariat: We would like to consider it in the future based on your opinions.

I would like to add one point. When we proceed with identification work in the future, we believe that there will be characters outside the scope of the administrative operation standard characters. As for the trade names you mentioned in the example earlier, Digital Agency does not intend to aim for internationalization, so I think that such characters will be excluded first.

Member: Since this is an initiative by Digital Agency, if the character codes and character fonts are announced in detail as open data, is there a plan to make public comments at some stage of the work?

Secretariat: Identification Support Tool is not mandatory, and Digital Agency hopes to develop an identification support tool to support identification and have local government use it because the cost will be lower if identification is performed based on the same procedures and standards.

Based on this concept, Digital Agency does not intend to make public comments on the results of identification.

Member: If it is positioned that it will be used only in administrative operation and will not be forced to be used, I think it is unnecessary to carry out public comments.

Member: We believe that the ultimate goal of this project is international standardization.

Becoming an international standard is truly a public asset, so it will become a global common property. It must be open, and there must be a process to reflect your opinions. In the process of international standardization, I think it is necessary to make public comments.

Member: , I am worried that it will affect the goal of standardizing the local government system.

Member: .

Regarding page 24 of Exhibit 1, there is no standard font format, and although there are some that seem to be de facto standards, there are various font formats. In addition, it is unlikely that "the character codes of external characters are implementation in Unicode" as in the exhibit.

In addition, on page 25 of Handout 1, it is written that it is a normal character and a variant character, but this should also be avoided. I think that consideration for typeface fairness and equality should be paid attention.

Secretariat: We are aware of the points you pointed out. We would like to revise the document based on your comments and issue it.

Member: , but has there been any response?

Secretariat: We received questions about the contents of the report.

Member: Working Group (tentative) will be established, but will the approval of the results of the review there be made in a place other than this Review Committee?

Secretariat: Working Group (tentative), a working group (tentative) will be created in demonstration projects and will be examined only within the working group. Therefore, we do not assume a process in which the results are officially approved by this Review Meeting.

However, I would like to report on the contents discussed in the working group (tentative) at this review meeting, and if you have any opinions, I would like to bring back those opinions, introduce the opinions raised at the review meeting within the working group (tentative), and summarize the opinions of the working group (tentative).

Member: , an interim report by demonstration projects, including the review by the working group (tentative), is also scheduled. Since the report of this Review Meeting seems to be necessary based on the results of demonstration projects, it is necessary to maintain this Review Meeting until the end of demonstration projects.

Member: Review Board, but there is a matter that I am concerned about. I am sorry if this matter is not under the jurisdiction of this Review Board, but in response to the discussion of this Review Board on how to specifically change the characters in the system of 20 operations, if further reviews are conducted in each of the 20 operations in the future, there is a possibility that it will be postponed.

What I am most worried about is when the discussions related to this Study Group will end. I thought that someone should think about the specific outlook and direction, so I would like to raise it as a problem awareness.

Secretariat: Of course, we would like to take your thoughts seriously and proceed. As for the font file problem, we initially proposed that we would like to ask for two fonts, but there were opinions from all of you that it would be difficult, and we thought that we could not make it into one font. There are some that are behind the curve, but I would like you to understand that we are trying to change it for the better for you, and I would like to think about it with you.

Member: . On the other hand, I am aware that the country and Digital Agency are trying to set a deadline.
However, as a result, if there is a part that is placed in the middle in the course of the project, it will be a very troublesome situation for the local government site. I am most concerned about this. So, I would like you to proceed with this carefully.

Member: Moji really has a huge amount of work and serious problems, and I understand well that there are many things to do by all means, and it will be behind the curve. On the other hand, according to the Basic Policies, it is stated that the deadline of the end of fiscal 2025 should be observed except for some special provisions. In addition, it is also stated that the data requirements and cooperation requirements should be met by all means. In short, it is desirable that the data requirements and cooperation requirements are met by all means, but the character requirements have a transitional measure, so it is necessary to recognize where they are fiddling with in the overall schedule.

Basically, the standard specifications are supposed to be ready by the end of March 2023, so this has already passed, but on the other hand, it is scary that the data requirements and cooperation requirements may change again.

While the overall schedule is moving, if something changes here, it may affect the specifications of the 20 operations. We must be aware that we are discussing this. However, it is not good to decide on a tight schedule and end up with something that is not good, so I thought it is necessary to be aware that we are doing this as a part of the whole.

Secretariat: Of course, we would like to proceed steadily. Although there are transitional measures, the basic data requirements and cooperation requirements have not changed. I would like you to understand that we are trying to change the font file issue for the better for you. I also suggested that we would like to ask for two fonts, but there are opinions from everyone that it is difficult, and we are thinking about making one font based on that. Although the progress is difficult, I would like to think about it together. I would like you to understand that we are moving to reduce the burden on you as much as possible.

Member: ?

Member: There is no objection. We would like to continue to cooperate with the smooth progress of the meeting.

Member: , there is no problem here either. I was worried whether the study would really be completed within the period proposed until now, but from now on, I would like to consider a response toward the end of fiscal 2025.

Member: Since there seems to be no objection, this review meeting will be extended as proposed by the Secretariat.
If there are no other opinions, I would like to end the proceedings here.

End