(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.4775) Preliminary result of vote on N1929

[Dan Nagle]

Hi,

I hope everyone realizes that there is no normative text anywhere in 24772.

I certainly don't object to changes, but let's not do so under a mis-impression.

On Sep 14, 2012, at 12:25 , Van Snyder <Van.Snyder at jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:

> On Fri, 2012-09-14 at 13:07 +0100, John Reid wrote:
>> Here is the preliminary result of the ballot on N1929. I think there
>> is little 
>> doubt that the ballot has failed.
>> 
>> I have changed Van's vote to No and removed the first sentence of his
>> comments, which was
>>     Replace "must" by "shall" throughout.
>> Is this OK, Van?
> 
> "Throughout" was perhaps too strong, as Malcolm pointed out.  But "must"
> isn't an ISO word, at least not in almost all of the contexts used in
> the Vulnerabilities report annex.  Maybe replace it with "check whether
> 'must' ought to be 'is required to be' (almost everywhere)".
> 
>> On the assumption that this is OK, I have also removed the last two
>> paragraphs of Malcolm's comments because they address the sentence
>> that has been removed. 
>> Is this OK, Malcolm?
> 
> I would keep them both, unless Malcolm crafts a statement that doesn't
> require the presence of my objection in order to make sense.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> J3 mailing list
> J3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org
> http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> J3 mailing list
> J3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org
> http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3

-- 
Cheers!

Dan Nagle