SPC-3 editorial inconsistency
Edward A. Gardner
eag at ophidian.com
Wed Jan 21 09:32:06 PST 2004
* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* "Edward A. Gardner" <eag at ophidian.com>
I encountered the following while reviewing the minutes from last week's
meetings. While arguably trivial, it did manage to leave me thoroughly
confused for several minutes. Ralph has agreed to make the suggested
change, but asked me to post this to the reflector first.
SPC-3 annex C uses the following codes in Table C.2, Table C.3, Table C.4
and file op-num.txt:
M = Mandatory
O = Optional
V = Vendor specific
Z = Obsolete
However Table 38 in clause 6.1 uses the following codes for substantially
M = Command implementation is mandatory.
O = Command implementation is optional.
OB = Command implementation is defined in a previous standard
X = Command implementation requirements given in reference subclause of
Z = Command implementation is device type specific.
The use of different codes for the same information, particularly the
different interpretation of "Z", is quite confusing.
In Table 38, clause 6.1, make the following changes:
Change all occurrences of the code "Z" to "C" (for command set). Also,
command implementation is defined by command set standards, we have no
"device type" standards, so change the definition of this code to read:
C Command implementation is defined in the applicable
command standard (see 3.1.17)
Change all occurrences of the code "OB" to "Z".
Edward A. Gardner eag at ophidian dot com
Ophidian Designs 719 593-8866 voice
1262 Hofstead Terrace 719 210-7200 cell
Colorado Springs, CO 80907
* 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