MMC-x meant where MMC-2 said
ralphoweber at compuserve.com
Thu Feb 13 16:21:17 PST 2003
* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* Ralph Weber <ralphoweber at compuserve.com>
MMC-2 was the published standard when SPC-2 was
proposed for standardization in a T10 letter ballot.
For the purposes of standards development, letter
ballot is the only time when nits such as this
need to be or should be considered.
MMC-x cannot be used in a dpANS because it is not
a precise reference to a published standard.
Pat LaVarre wrote:
>* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
>* "Pat LaVarre" <LAVARRE at iomega.com>
>>Table 57 â Peripheral device type
>>05h MMC-2 CD-ROM device
>Is the "-2" of "MMC-2" significant here?
>Or should I read "MMC-2" to mean "MMC" whose bleeding edge I'm told is:
>Curiously, cluelessly, thankfully yours, Pat LaVarre
>P.S. Would be nice if scsi-3.htm distinguished "final drafts" from the lesser drafts of the bleeding edge.
>* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
>* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at t10.org
* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at t10.org
More information about the T10