Cliff wrote: >Now we have to determine what constitutes a valid "attempt to get the >ambiguity clarified before implementing." This part of my comment was less about the history of this issue, and more trying to promote better practices in the future. Despite our efforts, there will be ambiguities in the P1800 LRM. If everyone goes off and implements their own interpretation, then we won't have a standard language. We need to encourage implementors to bring such things to the standards group for clarification before implementing. Steven Sharp sharp@cadence.comReceived on Wed Apr 27 13:02:27 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Apr 27 2005 - 13:03:27 PDT