Rewriting the scope of Part 3

Jesper Lund Stocholm jesper.stocholm at
Tue Jul 5 22:04:18 CEST 2011

Hi Chris,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Rae [mailto:Chris.Rae at]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 8:12 PM
> To: Jesper Lund Stocholm; MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given); SC34
> Subject: RE: Rewriting the scope of Part 3
> Hi Jesper - I think this is right, and this actually matches what
> san was mentioning about us seeding the pre-processor in those Parts.
> was something that Florian had worked on during the Berlin WG4
> and I think the solution works well but I'd like to see that
> into the standard before we think about separating these Parts into
> standards.

Just to be clear: I am not advocating creating new standards for Part 2
and Part 3. I think we should keep them as parts of 29500 but remove any
dependencies/correlations to the other parts of 29500. If there are
specificities to how Part 1+4 uses MCE or OCP, this information should
be put in Part 1 and 4 of 29500 - keeping MCE and OPC sufficiently clean
to be reused by other standards.

Med venlig hilsen / Best regards

Jesper Lund Stocholm

CIBER Danmark A/S
Mobil: +45 3094 5570
Email: jesper.stocholm at

materials in this electronic transmission (including attachments) may be
subject to attorney-client or work product privilege, may be private and
confidential and are the property of the sender. The information
contained is intended only for the named addressee(s) and should not be
considered evidence of intent to be bound to any agreement. The taking
of any action in reliance on the contents is strictly prohibited. If you
are not the intended recipient of this message, please immediately
notify the sender and promptly delete this message.

More information about the sc34wg4 mailing list