At the annual ISO meeting, the US gave input on ISO10110-12amd and ISO10110-19. 

Highlights
- The US continued to support ISO10110-6 (centering) and 10110-5 (surface figure and form) sufficiently.

- The US gave specific language for -12 that effectively references Qcon and corrects the equations and language around the Qbfs representations.

- The US gave input to the leader of -19 to help clarify. Specific USnotes on -19:
The confusion over the word "Freeform" versus "Specifying General Surfaces" or some variant caused a lot of the discussion. Allen pointed out that in the discussion that the standard can refer to:
a. The surface itself (the physical item or surface)
b. The mathematical description of the surface
c. Fabrication and test methods to make said surface

The US view is that it is the specification is what we are after, but it obviously must be done clearly so it can be effectively tied and assessed for fabrication, testing, and the finished product. My personal view is that you have taken a pragmatic approach that we support. We just need the language to be sure users understand that -19 is a superset of surface types that includes what can be done in other parts of the standard.

The US can check the text and writing (unofficially per se, without a ballot in the US but along the lines of our delegation discussion) if you want me to do it. The term complex surface should be clarified; and the idea that -19 encompasses -12 should be made, along with noting that -12 should be used for simplicity when it can be used.