DR-16-0009: Pushback from Charlie after WG4 agreed to close this without action

Rex Jaeschke rex at RexJaeschke.com
Wed Dec 14 14:15:20 CET 2016

-----Original Message-----
From: Charlie Clark [mailto:charlie.clark at clark-consulting.eu] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2016 7:59 AM
To: Rex Jaeschke <rex at rexjaeschke.com>
Subject: SPAM-LOW: Re: DR-16-0009: WG4 agreed to close this without action. See attached.

Am .12.2016, 18:55 Uhr, schrieb Rex Jaeschke <rex at rexjaeschke.com>:

Hi Rex,

I'm slightly confused by this. The suggestion was to remove an unrealistic normative assertion from the narrative description of the specification. I don't see how this can be interpreted as an extension. The important thing is that the descriptive and formal parts of the standard are in agreement wherever possible and here they most definitely are not.

The solutions I proposed:

	1) update the schema to match the description
	2) mark the current normative aspect of the description as exemplary
	3) remove the normative aspect of the description as it is misleading

Can you explain how any of these can be considered as an extension?

Charlie Clark
Managing Director
Clark Consulting & Research
German Office
Kronenstr. 27a
D sseldorf
D- 40217
Tel: +49-211-600-3657
Mobile: +49-178-782-6226

More information about the sc34wg4 mailing list