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 
similar information:

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 
this standard.
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.



Recommended change:

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 mailing list