FW: possible issues with COR2

[Rex Jaeschke]

I received the following, private correspondence from Murata-san:

 

“I compared the DR index and the latest DCORs.  If I'm not mistaken, some
DRs closed for DCOR2 are not include[d] in the CORs, while one DR in the
DCORs are not closed.

 

Part 1 

-09-0208

-09-0209

-09-0210

-09-0211

-09-0213

 

Part 3

-09-0229

 

Part 4 

-09-0317

-09-0318

+11-0021”

Here is my response:

Part 1: -09-0208

Part 1: -09-0209

Part 1: -09-0210

Part 1: -09-0211

Part 1: -09-0213

 

As indicated at the bottom of each corresponding DR log file (DR-09-0208
through 0213), these DRs were subsumed by the resolution to DR 09-0207. As
such, there are no trace-back pointers to these 5 DRs in the DCOR2, only to
09-0207.

 

Part 3: -09-0229

 

The resolution to this DR was to add a missing period to §10.1.3,
“PreserveElements and PreserveAttributes Attributes”. However, the
resolution to DR 10-0035 was to delete that whole subclause and its
subordinate subclauses.

 

Part 4: -09-0317

Part 4: -09-0318

 

According to the corresponding DR log files (DR-11-031x.docx), the
resolution for these DRs is contained in that for DR 09-016. However, I see
a difference in the way I recorded the DR trace backs for these 3 DRs in
Parts 1 and 4. Specifically, in Part 1, the trace back pointers read, “[DR
09-0316, DR 09-0317, DR 09-0318]”, while in Part 4, it reads, “[DR
09-0316]”. That is, the Part 4 trace back does not acknowledge all the
originating DRs. That said, the trace backs will not be published in the
final COR anyway; they are present for the benefit of WG4 members only.

 

Part 4: +11-0021

 

According to the DR log file (DR-11-0021.docx), the edits are contained in
the WG4 documents 0209 and 0215. And these are present in the DCOR2 Parts 1
and 4. The DR log file shows the status of that DR as “Closed, COR2”, which
is correct. The DR log summary spreadsheet also shows the same status.
However, although edits were applied to Parts 1 and 4, the spreadsheet
column for Part 4 is empty when it should contain “X”. I will correct that.

 

The good news is that the COR2 text requires no change.

 

Rex

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.vse.cz/pipermail/sc34wg4/attachments/20120117/ccea9530/attachment.htm>