PLEASE PROOF: Draft COR Set 1 for 29500

[Francis Cave]

No, that is not what WG4 decided in Prague and presented to SC34. 

JTC 1 rules say that if a change fixes something that is unimplementable - e.g. inconsistencies in normative text - that can and should be fixed in a COR. The document that we spent considerable time on in Prague sets out the conditions under which a change that DOESN'T fix something that is already broken can be in a COR rather than in an AMD. If such a change can theoretically break existing implementations, the change should be in an AMD, not in a COR.

As I understand it, EDITORIAL changes that don't define new features or change existing features can and should be in a COR.

Francis Cave



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rex Jaeschke [mailto:rex at RexJaeschke.com]
> Sent: 03 July 2009 18:45
> To: 'SC 34 WG4'
> Subject: RE: PLEASE PROOF: Draft COR Set 1 for 29500
> 
> I believe WG4 decided that any DR that raised issues that were supposed
> to be implemented as a result of the BRM, but which were not, were
> assigned to a COR.
> 
> Rex
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Innovimax SARL [mailto:innovimax at gmail.com]
> > Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 1:23 PM
> > To: Rex Jaeschke
> > Cc: SC 34 WG4
> > Subject: Re: PLEASE PROOF: Draft COR Set 1 for 29500
> >
> > Thanks Rex !
> >
> > I'm suprised that all the Percentage Related stuff are in the COR
> >
> > My understanding was that all that makes EXISTING document invalid
> goes
> > to AMD
> >
> > Why are those one gone to COR ?
> >
> > Mohamed
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Rex Jaeschke<rex at rexjaeschke.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Attached are the 4 Draft Technical Corrigenda, more than a week
> ahead
> > of
> > > schedule. Please proof them and send any comments to this email
> list
> > as soon
> > > as possible. The plan is to review and, hopefully, close-out and
> > approve
> > > these on the phone call of July 23.
> > >
> > > These are complete with the exception of 2 DRs, 09-0157 and 09-
> 0216.
> > The
> > > debate on these 2 DRs can continue on the email list, and we can
> > close them
> > > on the phone call.
> > >
> > > Note that the non-trivial changes to the Relax NG schema are NOT
> > included.
> > > As we agreed, they will come later.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Rex
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Innovimax SARL
> > Consulting, Training & XML Development
> > 9, impasse des Orteaux
> > 75020 Paris
> > Tel : +33 9 52 475787
> > Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
> > http://www.innovimax.fr
> > RCS Paris 488.018.631
> > SARL au capital de 10.000 €
> 
>