Comment resolution on SPC-2
PJohansson at acm.org
Fri Jun 29 14:45:32 PDT 2001
* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* Peter Johansson <PJohansson at ACM.org>
At 08:57 AM 6/28/01, Ralph Weber wrote:
>The public review comment indicated that the new target descriptor would
>be in reference to SBP-2, a very published
>standard. Why does the proposed resolution need to reference unpublished
Strictly speaking, it doesn't. It is possible to reference IEEE Std
1394a-2000 (a published standard) for the EUI-64 and to word the
description of DIRECTORY ID in such a way that it is not necessary to cite
draft standard IEEE P1212.
But, it is my understanding that T10 and other standards development bodies
endeavor to provide the most useful, most current reference whenever
possible. This includes references to standards under development.
>I am having some difficulty understanding how a change that makes
>normative reference to unpublished standards belongs in SPC-2 and not in SPC-3.
And I am having some difficulty in understanding what canon you think you
are citing that prohibits such reference. Because of the near impossibility
of synchronizing standards development work that often spans multiple
projects and multiple documents, T10 has made reference to standards in
development in the past. T10 is not alone in doing this. Certainly there is
a preference for completed work---but I believe there is no rule that bars
reference to work in progress.
Incidentally, "draft" standard IEEE P1212 has just completed a 10-day
recirculation ballot with at least 92% affirmative and there is nothing
between it and formal approval as an IEEE standard other than the
completion of paper work.
Congruent Software, Inc.
98 Colorado Avenue
Berkeley, CA 94707
(510) 527-3856 FAX
PJohansson at ACM.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