(j3.2006) components that are data objects?

[Michael Ingrassia]

NOTE 15.12 [398] says

The syntax rules and their constraints require that a derived type
that is interoperable have components that are all data objects
that are interoperable.


Is there something askew with our language here?   I thought that
data objects were constants, variables, or subobjects of constants.
So how can a component be a data object ?  You might even have
a derived type for which no variables are ever declared!

What's the proper usage?

Is "derived type ... have components"   is wrong?
	Types don't have components, structures do.
Is "components that are ... data objects" wrong ?
	Components aren't data objects.



	--Michael I.