Skip to main content

This page has been translated using TexTra by NICT. Please note that the translation may not be completely accurate.
If you find any mistranslations, we appreciate your feedback on the "Request form for improving the automatic translation ".

The 8th Study Meeting on the Operation of Character Requirements in local governments Information Systems

Overview

  • Date and Time: Thursday, March 28, 2024 (2024) from 10:00 to 12:00
  • Location: Sabo Kaikan Annex / Online
  • Order of business
    1. Review of the 7th Review Meeting (Revision of Character Requirements)
    2. Revision of Character Requirements
    3. About demonstration projects Report
    4. Dissemination and public relations
    5. Documents released at the end of March
    6. Other

Materials

Summary of proceedings

Date

  • Thursday, March 28, 2024 (2024), from 10:00 to 12:00

Location

  • Sabo Kaikan Annex B3 Floor Kirishima / 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
  • Mitsuhiro Tsubota (Information Policy Manager, Hino City Planning Department)
  • 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.)
  • Shukyu Omura (Fujitsu Japan Limited)
  • Ryota Takaiwa (FUJIFILM System Service Co., Ltd. (attendance by proxy))
  • Yuki Hayase (Ryobi Systems Co., Ltd.)
  • Masakazu Yoshida (RYOMO SYSTEMS CO.,LTD.)

Observer

  • 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)
  • Shunto SUDO (Section Chief, Local Digital Platform Planning Office, Resident Systems Division, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications Autonomous Administrative Bureau)
  • Takuya Hazama (Section Chief of the First Civil Affairs Division, Civil Affairs Bureau, Ministry of
  • Tenkai Okazaki (Administrative Officer of the Office of Counselor in Charge of Information to the Director-General for Policy Planning and Evaluation of Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare)

Agenda

  1. Review of the 7th Review Meeting (Revision of Character Requirements)
  2. Revision of Character Requirements
  3. About demonstration projects Report
  4. Dissemination and public relations
  5. Documents released at the end of March
  6. Other

Proceedings

  • At the 8th meeting, the Secretariat reviewed the 7th Review Meeting as a matter to be reported, and reported that regarding the revision of the character requirements, based on the opinions of the Committee members, the revision proposals such as "transitional measure period," "cooperation during the transitional measure period," "handling of unregistered characters," and "character encoding method" were changed.
  • The Secretariat provided explanations on "Revision of Character Requirements," "demonstration projects Report," "Dissemination and Public Relations," and "Materials to be Released at the End of March" based on Material 1.

Question and

Member: Revision Proposal (1) I would like to confirm the transitional measure period. Originally, I had an impression that it was difficult to understand because what I expected was the number of years and months. In the end, the completion deadline of the transition difficulty system will be the end of the transitional measure period, but in that case, there are various transition difficulty systems, and some may take a long time, but will it be tailored to the final runner? If there are more than 1,700 transition difficulty systems, I would like to confirm that the transitional measure will last for five or ten years. local government

Secretariat: . However, this is only a deadline, so we have no choice but to accept the final runner, but we are thinking of accepting the transition as soon as possible for the other local government, and depending on the situation, we would like to consider moving it forward while monitoring the situation.

Member: , I would like to confirm one more thing. Will the deadline for completion of the transition difficulty system and the transitional measure related to characters always be the same? In other words, if there is a system that is not a transition difficulty system, that has no particular problem in parts other than characters, but has a problem only in characters, I don't think it is a transition difficulty system now, but how will such a system be handled?

Secretariat: We are in the middle of sorting this out. I would like to show you the details in the FAQ.

Member: I think that the completion deadline of the transition difficulty system will probably be a big topic in the future, but what if it is prolonged? I think that it will not be forgotten, but since the completion deadline is not clearly set, I felt that it is easy to disappear. That remains as a severity of nausea, so I hope that we can proceed while confirming "by when we will complete it" with everyone.

Member: Secretariat, the transition of character codes takes a tremendous amount of time. In the past, there were new and old JIS problems. In 1978, two 7-bit Kanji codes were created, and in 1983, they were revised. At that time, incompatible characters were replaced, and as new and old JIS problems, great confusion occurred both in local government and in the market. It was not until 2000, when a large set of Kanji called X0213 in JIS was created, that the new and old JIS problems could be revised institutionally. However, at that time, there were JIS code positions that could not be expressed unless they were expressed in surrogate pair and Unicode, which are called Extension B and use two 16 bits. As I heard from you, it seems that there are some systems that cannot be realized by the systems actually used in the local local government. That means that they have not been realized even after half a century since 1983. Therefore, I think that the transition measures will take a great amount of time. However, as the Secretariat said, I think it is important to make tireless efforts, to always show what should be, and to create an atmosphere in which each local government can easily catch up depending on its own situation and budget. On the other hand, consistency with international standards will include us, but we will make efforts as soon as possible to show what should be and what will be consistent with international standards.

Secretariat: . At the previous Review Meeting, surrogate pair presented a Issue that there are about one third of vendors who cannot respond to surrogate pair by standardization. In response, we are showing a response plan with the cooperation of everyone in the Council. Based on the response plan, we would like to proceed at once, so we would like to continue our cooperation.

Member: , I would like to confirm one point. The point is to confirm the compliance reference date for the cooperation during the transitional measure period in (1) (ii). I recognize that all standard specifications are the same regardless of the character requirements, but I would like to talk about it again because I have received various inquiries from local government. As for other standard specifications, it is the functional requirements of each business that there is a compliance reference date, and the compliance standard is basically set at the end of the fiscal year 2025 and April 1, 2014. It is confirmed whether the so-called compliance reference date for the cooperation during the transitional measure period in administrative operation standard characters is basically the same as the end of the fiscal year 2025 and April 1, 2014, leaving aside groups with difficulty in transition. As a background, while there are local government and other local government that have already begun to be introduced, there are many local government that will start operation before the transition deadline. At the stage of operation, whether it is absolutely necessary to operate in administrative operation standard characters is realistically impossible in local government, which is about to start operation, and there are inquiries about it, so I would like to confirm whether the point of time when it is compliant is the so-called transition deadline.

Secretariat: The compliance base date will be April 1, 2026. Since the transitional measures will be established after that, I think that the relationship between the transitional measures and the compliance base date will be organized again and presented in the form of FAQ.

Associate Member: I understand that it will be basically April 1, 2014. Please continue to share information.

Member: I am very sorry to return to the original topic, but I understand that the provisions of the character requirements themselves are largely based on the Standardization Act and the Act on Standardization of local governments Information Systems. Among them, for example, in terms of the details of the law, the delegation to the Cabinet Order is decided in Article 13, so I think the specific parts are specified by the Cabinet Order. I have participated in several other standardization review meetings, and at the review meeting on standardization of individual operations, quite a few outputs in the form of standard specifications have been produced as documents and compiled, so it is somewhat easy to image. On the other hand, the provisions of the character requirements this time, the concept of the planning period, and how to coordinate them are exactly the same as I explained earlier, but I would be grateful if you could tell me in a way that I can create an image of how this will be officially announced. If you are not ready to that extent, it is fine to say that an announcement will be made around that time, but I would be grateful if you could tell me.

Secretariat: Actually, as I talked with you earlier about your comments, on Monday this week, as the text requirements for the general remarks on data requirements and cooperation requirements, we are presenting the full text of the new and old requirements in a way that you can understand that this is the part that is being revised this time. For local government, we are issuing it on Monday through the simultaneous inquiry system, and if you look at it, you can see that No. 2 has not changed, and No. 1, No. 3, and No. 4 are being revised like this, although the current situation is like this. We would appreciate if you could take a look at it and give us your opinions.

Member: identification support tool has been improved. However, during my visit, I understood that AI basically performed the identification work first, and then the people in charge of public office and those with practical experience performed the character identification as experts. In character identification, as I heard in the middle of the meeting, while examining the attribute information, we determine whether the character is a variant of this character or an independent character, not a variant of any character, while making repeated guesses. However, I am curious about what made such a division this time, such as that a certain character identification was completed or that this character was not completed. I believe that this was done mechanically by applying a kind of subsumption standard, but in reality, for example, the Chinese character Tomehane is considered to be a design difference in most cases, but it becomes a different character depending on the reading and usage. In short, there are characters in proper nouns in which Tomehane functions to indicate a difference, and it may be better to pass on the knowledge of experts. I expressed my opinion first that the character identification was completed. Next, in relation to the current topic, there was a matter that the character family registry includes these variations among the approximately 700,000 characters in the family registry system. Here, it has been often explained that we have identified it at the Ministry of Justice committee, but in reality, there are many characters that we have seen for the first time, and it is true that the members of the Ministry of Justice committee have been identifying characters that have been organized to some extent. It is intuitive that all of them can be said to be design differences, but from the experience of setting the Chinese character design difference and the JIS subsumption standard, some subtle things are honestly included. Next, I will move on to the examination of responses, but in ②, there was something about the trade name. The trade name and the name of the company are also important information, and I wonder if the characters used therein can be easily substituted. I heard before that there is a direction to add to MJ +, but I am curious about whether they are heading in the direction of substitution or identification, so I would like to hear this later. I also saw the contents of the registered unified characters, but there are many characters of local place names that are treated by fixed asset tax, etc., that is, detailed place names that are not included in JIS Level 3 or 4, and some of them are called local characters or dialect Chinese characters, and some of them are treated as independent characters in the Yuki unified characters. These are not treated properly. If we proceed further, I am worried that it will become a root of trouble and problems will appear later. Also, around ③ and ⑥, regarding the names and addresses of foreigners, the names of people from China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and South Korea, in particular, the names below, there are characters that are only used by those individuals. We have been doing our best to register such names in UCS, but it is also true that MJ has not been able to respond sufficiently. If we proceed in the direction of forcibly replacing such names with different characters, I am worried that some problems will occur later. Most of them were opinions, but there were some questions I wanted to ask, so I would like to ask you.

Member: As a point, I think there were about four topics, but I would like to ask the secretariat.

Secretariat: Identification Support Tool is a character development project of the Ministry of Justice. It performs development based on a conversion table in which 700,000 characters of the family registry system are associated with 70000 characters of the administrative operation standard character. This time, as a pre-process of the conversion table, it uses AI to match input characters with 700,000 characters of the family registry system. As you mentioned here, there are various subtle points such as Hane and Ten. This time, we are conducting detailed channelling through demonstration projects. Of course, because it is AI, the identification ratio is not 100%, but it is sufficiently high enough for practical use. We would like to present it as the most appropriate tool to support the identification work of people in local government throughout Japan. Also, based on the names of businesses and companies, such as registered unified characters, this is an issue that should be added to MJ +, for example. On the other hand, in terms of standardization, if we are not aware of twenty twenty-five, people in local government and vendors may be lost. We will quickly confirm the status of registered unified characters toward twenty twenty-five, and then we will indicate whether this registered unified character should be included, or what should be done because it is practically impossible to do so in this period. And regarding ③ and ⑥. If there is an address or name, we will discuss with the ministries and agencies what kind of arrangements are made in the system and whether there are any rules. If there are any rules, we will consider whether it is possible to identify it as MJ +. If there are no rules, we will consider with each ministry and agency whether it is possible to identify it as MJ +. In short, we wrote identification in MJ + as a general rule, but we would like to take firm evidence and then present it as a procedure to people in local government.

Member: I understood your explanation.

Member: In addition to what I just said, I felt that it would be better to have a list of Issue to be continued and Issue to be examined. International standardization is one thing, but there are many topics that will not be separated in this fiscal year, so I thought it would be good to sort them out once.

Member: This study group believes that it is a place to study how to bring the kanji that diverged in the Meiji period into the world of codes and computers. As a matter of course, there is no answer that can satisfy all the people, so the administrative operation standard characters are summarized on the premise that there is a certain limit, and I think that we should discuss what kind of problems will occur by establishing them and find a place where as many people as possible can be satisfied.
If so, the origin of the past does not have much to do with it, and we should recruit monitors and make judgments from the perspective of what people living today think and how they use it. In addition, there is no end if such people start saying that it would be better to do so, so I wonder if it is necessary to go back to family registry every time. It would be fine if family registry were done academically in family registry, so at this review meeting, we should pick up only the problems that must be sorted out.
In administrative operation, I would be grateful if as many Japanese as possible who are alive today could find a point of contact that would satisfy them in using the same characters.

Secretariat: You are absolutely right. First of all, as discussed in this Study Group, we do not deny the significance of characters as an identity, and we understand that such characters are absolutely necessary for the time being. Nevertheless, what we must consider is exactly what characters should be used as a standard in administrative work, as the name of these characters suggests, and that it is important to consider them from the perspective of public nature and rationality. Next, in order to ensure your identity, we have reached the point that 70000 administrative operation standard characters, not the original 10,000 characters or 60000 characters, are necessary. Therefore, I believe that it is the general agreement of this Study Group that if there are 70000 characters, characters can be identified in a form that ensures identity. In addition, what I would like to confirm at the end of this meeting is how the rules concerning characters are decided in each business system. When we actually present the identification to MJ + to the people of local government as a written procedure, we will present it to you after we have agreed with the ministries and agencies responsible for each business that the identification will be made to MJ + because the system is like this in the first place. Regarding the coordination of these ministries and agencies, we are not planning to take months to do this, but if possible, we will indicate the identification to MJ + as a procedure in the form of identification to MJ +. Regarding the parts that cannot be coordinated by any means, we will continue to coordinate with each ministry and agency separately, and we will draw a conclusion.

Member: I think it was very difficult to summarize this. When I was at the scene, it was difficult to organize even within my own local government, so I think it was well organized. Among them, at the top of page 12, there were 293514 characters, but when I asked one question to the right, I understood that the characters with the non-target flag, which are said to be about 40000 characters, should not be used. In addition, regarding the characters without the second flag below, depending on whether or not there is an identification destination, I understood that it would be 200,000 characters and other characters, and that the 48452 characters are also characters that should not be identified, so I should not use them. If I make a mistake, I would like to point out later, but I wanted to ask what kind of specific character the characters with the target flag are and what kind of character the third character below that, which should not be identified, is. I would like to ask your opinion on whether this understanding is correct. In addition, I would like to go back to page 10, but in listening to the members of the Committee up to now, if I simply express it as the work of local government's hands and feet, if there are residents who have the character of family registry on the left, they will change it to the character of local government on the right in the future. And in this material, there are expressions of unusable characters and characters that cannot be used institutionally, but I made a judgment whether they can be used in the proper characters of Yuki or not. I understand that the people who are still struggling in Yuki are naturally able to navigate for those who are born and newly born, and children, but the residents have been using the left side from the front, and now it will be the right side. I would like to ask if there is any difference in the way of thinking about that.

Secretariat: I have omitted an explanation here, but we collected characters from everyone in 113 local government, and there were about 300,000 characters. When we collected them, we asked everyone in local government to add an ineligible flag because symbols are not eligible for identification. The 40000 characters were symbols, so we asked them to add an ineligible flag. There were 40000 characters that people in local government attached to us because they said that these characters are symbols, so we threw them into this system to identify the characters without this flag. However, it was not necessarily the case that they attached the ineligible flag to all symbols. As we continued the identification work, some symbols without the ineligible flag were mixed in. In fact, when I asked everyone in local government to add an ineligible flag, we originally appreciated it, but we heard that it would be a lot of work to do so, so we also said that it would be fine if not all the ineligible flags were attached. Therefore, the symbols without the flag were mixed in, and they were in the form of characters that should not be identified, about 50000 characters. Therefore, to put it roughly, what is recognized as Chinese characters without symbols is recognized as input values in the first place. This is the answer to the first point. And as you said about the second point, if you put the characters of snow, for example, as they are actually used in resident records, if you put the characters of snow, as a result, it will be identified as this snow of MJ +. I think there are various characters here. It is not limited to snow, and I have not seen how many kinds of characters there are in the end, but when you put the characters in, they are replaced by the characters of MJ +. That is what I show here.

Member: Until now, I have interpreted as if I have been explained in such a way, but will the characters be changed through cooperation? I think that organizations that adopt MJ + in the resident record itself will be the characters on the right if we think about it specifically. If we say that we will make not only the cooperation but also the database in such a form, it will be on the right and the characters will change. If that is the case, we must explain to the residents properly. When we talk about it, we will change the characters in the explanation by the residents to the characters that can be used in the system, as I said earlier. I thought again today that we must move forward with our hearts. With such a strong intention, I understood that the character set of the standards-compliant system itself will be changed. If there is understanding, that will be all.

Secretariat: That is exactly right, and I once again believe that we must provide explanations to the residents.

Member: MJ +. I mean, based on your discussions today and various surveys by Digital Agency so far, we have done tremendous work so far. We are pursuing how character sets for administrative operation should be, including verification. In the course of this, we found that there are a large number of characters that were once included in family registry Unified Character Set and are also included in the character information infrastructure. They are rarely used in modern Japanese society and have authority only in classical Chinese books. We are talking about creating an actual standard font by excluding them. I have various personal reasons to say, but I would like to cooperate as much as possible. In fact, we are trying to create a new, very empirically supported and persuasive character set for administrative operation, which is completely different from the character set created in the character information infrastructure. If so, we have stopped using MJ + and have created the administrative standard character set in Digital Agency. There may be some changes or additions. However, I think it is okay to say that we will do so based on the actual situation. If so, it will be easier for you to do so. Then, the standard character set for administrative operation can be requested to the international coded character set as it is. Without any preconditions. Without wanting authority or evidence of its use, which I was obsessed with before, I can say strongly that it is a character set needed in administrative operation. Therefore, I think it is okay to stop using the term MJ +. I think it is okay to say that the standard character set for administrative operation is development in Digital Agency. What do you think?

Secretariat: I also thought so. The name of administrative operation standard character is also defined in this, and I think it is a very good name representing the character to be used in administrative operation. If possible, I think it would be better to use this character. I have said that MJ + should be used as an abbreviation, but instead of MJ +, for example, it is good to set another abbreviation such as GJ for administrative operation.

Member: Standard characters are character sets that do not have code positions. Regardless of code positions, I would like you to proceed on the premise that there is such a character set. Among them, those that are already UCS or IVD compatible are fine, but those that cannot be associated are left as they are. And, I think that it will be an approach to request the association of them. That is one point. Also, in relation to the current situation, I think that a font that avoids IVD and surrogate pair will be created, but regarding that, my position has not changed from that it is a provisional font. I cannot change it. I would like to confirm only these two.

Secretariat: I was going to mention it later, but it is expressed as provisional, and now it is in the form of a provisional name and basic font, but we will consider a name that will allow us to know that it will be provisional six months later when it is actually created.

Member: Once again, character sets and the fonts used to use them are two different things. If you mix them up, it will be troublesome, so I would like you to discuss them separately.

Member: : What I am concerned about in your explanation earlier is the background of MJ, or rather, the history of its creation. My understanding is that IPA was created under the policy of METI, and now it is managed by the Council. In the explanation by the Secretariat earlier, the word "Digital Agency" was used in a new way of thinking, but is it correct to understand that in such a flow, it will be restored to something original?

Member: Council. I understand that what is being discussed here in Digital Agency is MJ + or GJ, and in other words, it is confirmation that there is no doubt that it is such a division in organization. In other words, is it that Digital Agency will always manage only the "+ (plus)" part? Or is it that Digital Agency will take over the entire MJ + as a new integrated part? I would like to ask for a response from the secretariat.

Secretariat: It will be divided like that. The old part is made by IPA, and now it is done by the Council with trust. On top of that, we will add about 10,000 words to the additional part and set GJ. So far, we are working on the arrangement. If you are saying that there may be various inconveniences if it is managed separately in the two parts, I think it is necessary to arrange it again in the future.

Member: The previous remark was intended to suggest that you stop adding MJ and do not add unnecessary things from the beginning, and create a new set of characters necessary for the current administrative operation. We have done that until now.

Secretariat: The details will be discussed in the future. Right now, we are working on it in installments, but I would like to organize it in the future.

Member: Materials, it is difficult to understand even if I say "core business systems" to the residents, so rather than that, shouldn't the catch copy be made so that everyone is unlikely to object to the Digital Agency's efforts? For example, shouldn't it be written in large letters as "We will unify the Chinese characters and fonts that are currently scattered in each local government throughout Japan" and in small letters as "First, we will start with the basic system"? First of all, I think it is better to show that this initiative is meaningful to the residents.
One more thing I would like to confirm is that the expression is "In the future, all of your name in Kanji will be like this." But wasn't it just that "This character will be used to notify you?" I think it would be good if it was publicized that it was not such a tragic story, such as changing the expression to the effect that "We will not change the character of family registry, but will only notify you with this character." What do you think?

Secretariat: Since we are working on the part of promoting standardization, it will be expressed as such. While focusing on what kind of impact it will have on those people, we will organize that there will be no change in family registry at least for now. After that, I would like to say that the other office work or the part from family registry will be handled in a rational manner as office work. I would like to make a notification like this. Today's image of public relations materials is only a sample, so I will make it firmly next fiscal year. And over the year after next, Digital Agency will show these to you. I would like to ask for your cooperation.

Member: Page 26. I would like you to stop using this character information infrastructure and change it to UCS. Also, on the right side of this, there is a code saying U + something, but in order not to cause a strange misunderstanding, it is better to insert the code position used in the provisional font that is actually being promoted. I think it is better to show in the public relations materials that this is a provisional code position until standardization.

Member: As Mr. Kobayashi said, it is important how it is received by experts, so I think public relations from such a perspective is also important.

Member: Materials, there is a description of character standardization, although it is only an expression. Based on the discussions so far, there is a possibility that unless administrative operation and the like are included, it will not be consistent with the policies of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. In addition, I think that the nature of the project this time will be clearer, so I suggest that it should be done in that way. In addition, on page 24, the word "character subsumption" is used, and there is an explanation in * 2. According to this, design-level characters are included, but I would like to confirm whether the change of characters this time refers to the design level or whether it includes changing the font, which has a slight difference. It may sound detailed, but I have been involved in the character code policy for about 30 years, but in JIS and the like, it was advanced without any academic support, so there are sometimes cases where I am confused about the operation later. I am worried that this large-scale project is being carried out by Digital Agency, so it will not be repeated. Finally, I could read in the materials that the characters not only in family registry but also in the Basic Resident Register will be changed, but on this page, in the second line of * 1, the Basic Resident Register and the like are listed as the objects of this standardization, so I think it can be read that it is not only family registry. Here, I don't think it is directly related, but the other day, it was reported that the design of My Number Card will be changed, and it became a topic of conversation in some parts because the Basic Resident Register and the like are used on the ticket. Regarding the Basic Resident Register and the like, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications once issued a report, and it was said that as many as 1.16 million characters are circulating as images of external characters, and this is not the result of a complete survey. I would like to ask whether Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications is identifying such characters. I should have seen all the characters of family registry in the project of the Ministry of Justice this time, but I can see from the examples in this report that there are many characters that are not seen there, in short, they are in the Basic Resident Register and not in family registry. It seems that it is not only the names of foreign people. I would like to say that there are concerns about the future because it is going forward without clarifying such matters. administrative operation

Secretariat: I believe that what we are doing here this time is just a difference in design. Basically, it is based on the identification conducted by the Ministry of Justice, so what we have heard is that what we have confirmed to some extent is a difference in character shapes, not a difference in font. Regarding characters with different font shapes, we have added about 9,000 new characters, so our view is that we are doing this time on the difference in basic character shapes, which is exactly a difference in design.

Member: I also think that it is better not to pay attention to details at the design level, and I hope that the general public will recognize it in such a way, so I think it is a good direction. In addition, regarding standardization, I think it is better to add administrative operation and others, but what do you think about that?

Secretariat: I would like to add that.

Member: ?

Observer: I would like to confirm and answer about the image of Gaiji.

Member: , we would like to receive your response again and share it via the Secretariat.

Member: . The Committee of the Ministry of Justice was also considering whether it could be the basis for it, but there was an explanation that it could be substituted in the processing system of administrative information processing, and the person who has this in his name, for example, has never seen anything with the right of this order in some documents. Is it correct to understand that this is how it is treated in this talk?

Secretariat: In the first place, I would like to ask why alternative characters are necessary. Among the 20 businesses, they use administrative operation standard characters instead of alternative characters. On the other hand, although there is no such thing at present, I think it is possible that in the future, in online application and other places, data will be linked from each business system to, for example, a smartphone. Smartphones can display only about 10,000 characters at present, so in such cases, we will use this alternative character to display on smartphones.

Member: In the earlier exchange, there was a discussion that it would be fine to call the whole of MJ + as GJ, not just the "+ (plus)" part. For example, in the table on page 29, the GJ character list appears in the second column of ②. Also, in the table below on page 29, there is the GJ character list 1.0 version. Is this written on the premise that the whole of MJ + should be called GJ? If so, the word MJ + is also included in the materials, so there is no sense of unity, and I wondered what this was.

Secretariat: In order to distinguish the part of additional characters from others in our work, we called the part of additional characters GJ.

Member: I understood that (1) was MJ and (2) was referring to the part that had been called "+ (plus)" as GJ. In the previous discussion, there was a slight discussion about whether or not to call the whole of MJ and "+ (plus)" as GJ, not only the plus part, but also the whole of MJ and "+ (plus)" as GJ, but I also understood that that was not the case yet. In any case, I think that it is necessary to organize the name and the target.

Member: Regarding the compulsory substitution of approximate characters, do I have to include "compulsory" only here? If it is disclosed, it may be removed because it has a coercive image.

Secretariat: For us, it is a larger alternative than the usual general alternative, so we have included compulsory, but if it is to that extent, we will remove it.

Member: system?

Member: I thought it would be good to include the meaning of automation and coercion in larger words. Would it be okay in such a form?

Member: , I would like to ask you a question. What will happen if the actual person concerned says that it is okay to write in kana? I think that it is much more compatible with society to write the missing characters in hiragana than to change them carelessly.

Secretariat: I think there may be such an individual response, but if it is individual response, the system will be very complicated, and it will take time and effort for everyone in local government to respond individually, so I think it will be promoted as an alternative for administrative operation standard characters.

Member: Personally, I think it would be much better to have it changed to Geta characters or Kuromaru than to have it changed to strange Chinese characters. I think there will be opposition if we actually proceed.

Secretariat: Since standard compliance system does not have a function that can be instantly displayed on a smartphone, I would like to start with such a function, and when such a function is actually developed as a standard compliance system function, I would like to consider it again based on the opinions of people around us.

Associate Member: In the explanation of the operation cycle of the public website on page 32, there is a threshold of 100 local government for one month. Will this be reviewed in the future? I think it does not have to be a response today, but I would like to ask you to consider it. As soon as this material is released, I am afraid that each local government will be in a state where they have to enter it for the time being. In that case, as a result of this frame being filled separately from the discussion of each introduction work, which originally requires identification results at this time, I felt that it was possible, although it was only an assumption, that identification results would not be delivered to the necessary local government at the originally necessary time. Is this also the number of fixed organizations?

Secretariat: 100 is the minimum value. That is my first point. We have heard the same thing from you, and I would like to raise this number as much as possible. On top of that, when I took a questionnaire in March asking when there is a possibility that it will be used in local government, most of them said that the time of use has not been decided yet. Therefore, I would like to wait and see in April or May, and during that time, we will consider whether we can increase the number by 100 and consider a systematic identification schedule based on the transition Plan.

Member: If there are no other opinions, I would like to end the proceedings here.

End