Recommendation on "The continued use of amendments to correct DRs"

[Jesper Lund Stocholm]

Hello Murata-san,

I appologize for chipping in so late - see comments below.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) [mailto:eb2m-mrt at asahi-net.or.jp]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 3:56 PM
> To: SC 34 WG4
> Subject: Re: Recommendation on "The continued use of amendments to
correct
> DRs"
> 
> Dear colleagues,
> 
> I had a quick look of DRs not covered by COR1, AM1, or AM2.  In
> particular, I focused on schema-changing DRs.
> 
> I would like to hear your opinion about  two DRs: 09-0193 and 09-0312.
Do
> people think that we can use CORs to address them?

Yes

While they are technically expanding the value-space of T/Part 4, they
are really just a correction of a defect.

> If we apply the same criteria as we applied before, AMs may be more
> appropriate for the DRs shown below.  In my understanding, Rex is
arguing
> to address them by CORs.
> 
> 09-0055 ?
> 09-0056 ?

Yes - we are tightening up the spec and essentially refactoring the
schemas to better suit the prose of the spec. I would almost say that it
falls between an editorial correction and a technical correction and not
anywhere near "addition of new functionality".

> 09-0061 ?

Yes - again are we tightening up the spec. We are not adding new
functionality - from a user's POV

> 09-0181 ?

Yes - we are not adding new functionality from a user POV - we are
solving an ambiguity in the spec.

> 09-0182 ?

Yes - same argument as above.

> 09-0223 ?

Yes - by same argument as above


:o)


Med venlig hilsen / Best regards

Jesper Lund Stocholm

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

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE AND NOTICE REGARDING NO ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE: The
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.