From owner-incits-v1@incits-v1.org Mon Jun 25 05:21:57 2007 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_mh+j4nqZET9Gkgm8H/+Sng)" Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 08:20:42 -0400 From: Stephen Peront Subject: RE: INCITS-V1: Wier - Part 1, Section 2.6 "Interoperability Guidelines" In-reply-to: <009201c7b721$6f794210$4e6bc630$@com> Sender: owner-incits-v1@incits-v1.org To: incits-v1@incits-v1.org Reply-to: incits-v1@incits-v1.org Content-language: en-us Thread-index: Ace3IW7EvCafzg91Sem5N9J3igeYrAAAbolg X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 This is a multipart message in MIME format. --Boundary_(ID_mh+j4nqZET9Gkgm8H/+Sng) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Sorry for the incomplete sentence below, it is meant to say: Regarding the following comment submitted by Rob: -Stephen From: owner-incits-v1@incits-v1.org [mailto:owner-incits-v1@incits-v1.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Peront Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 8:08 AM To: incits-v1@incits-v1.org Subject: INCITS-V1: Wier - Part 1, Section 2.6 "Interoperability Guidelines" Hi Team. Regarding the following comment submitted by: MB1 Clause No./ Subclause No./ Annex (e.g. 3.1) Paragraph/ Figure/Table/ Note (e.g. Table 1) Type of comment2 Comment (justification for change) by the MB Proposed change by the MB Secretariat observations on each comment submitted US Part 1, Section 2.6 "Interoperabilit y Guidelines" - ed The use of the word "element" is ambiguous. Is this to mean XML elements (but not attributes, character content, etc.)? Or does this mean an element of the Standard, in the usage of ISO Directives, Part 2? Clarify the use of the word "element" perhaps by saying "XML element" if that is what is meant. 2007-05-14: Submitted by Rob Weir as #1-027 2007-05-29: Discussed during meeting. Comment as is. I think the point of using the word element here is to be purposely ambiguous; which would imply referring to any element of this Standard (not XML element). I recommend that if we are going to comment on this that we change the "Proposed changed by the MB" to the following text: Define the word "element" so as to clarify its use in Part 1, Section 2.6, List Item #1, Lines 3-5. Have an awesome day! Cheers, -Stephen --Boundary_(ID_mh+j4nqZET9Gkgm8H/+Sng) Content-type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Sorry for the incomplete sentence below, it is meant to say:

 

Regarding the following comment submitted by Rob:

 

-Stephen

 

From: owner-incits-v1@incits-v1.org [mailto:owner-incits-v1@incits-v1.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Peront
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 8:08 AM
To: incits-v1@incits-v1.org
Subject: INCITS-V1: Wier - Part 1, Section 2.6 "Interoperability Guidelines"

 

Hi Team…

 

Regarding the following comment submitted by:

 

MB1

Clause No./

Subclause No./

Annex

(e.g. 3.1)

Paragraph/

Figure/Table/

Note

(e.g. Table 1)

Type

of

comment2

Comment (justification for change) by the MB

Proposed change by the MB

Secretariat observations

on each comment submitted

 

US

Part 1,

Section 2.6

“Interoperabilit

y Guidelines”

-

ed

The use of the word “element” is ambiguous. Is this to

mean XML elements (but not attributes, character

content, etc.)? Or does this mean an element of the

Standard, in the usage of ISO Directives, Part 2?

Clarify the use of the word “element” perhaps by

saying “XML element” if that is what is meant.

2007-05-14: Submitted by

Rob Weir as #1-027

2007-05-29: Discussed

during meeting. Comment as

is.

 

 

I think the point of using the word element here is to be purposely ambiguous; which would imply referring to any element of this Standard (not XML element). I recommend that if we are going to comment on this that we change the “Proposed changed by the MB” to the following text:

 

Define the word “element” so as to clarify its use in Part 1, Section 2.6, List Item #1, Lines 3-5.

 

 

Have an awesome day!

 

Cheers,

-Stephen

 

--Boundary_(ID_mh+j4nqZET9Gkgm8H/+Sng)--