How should ATA/ATAPI-8 be referenced?

[Curtis Stevens]

* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* "Curtis Stevens" <curtis.stevens at wdc.com>
*
The reference for this doc is ATA8-ACS.  The follow-on will be ACS-2.
-------------------------------------------------
Curtis E. Stevens
Sr. Staff  Engr - Standards & Features Technology
20511 Lake Forest Drive #A 113-F
Lake Forest, California 92630
Phone: 949-672-7933
Cell: 949-307-5050
E-Mail: Curtis.Stevens at WDC.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-t10 at t10.org [mailto:owner-t10 at t10.org] On Behalf Of Ralph Weber
Sent: Sunday, August 15, 2010 7:30 AM
To: 't10 at t10.org'
Subject: How should ATA/ATAPI-8 be referenced?
* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* Ralph Weber <roweber at ieee.org>
*
  During the CAP meeting, I was asked to change the Protocol
Identifier for ATA/ATAPI-7 to ATA/ATAPI-8.
This does not jibe with the Normative References section of
SPC-4, and I cannot see how to fix it.
ATA/ATAPI-8 is *not* an ISO/IEC project. The closest thing
to a project in this area is ATA-8 ACS.
Some might debate whether referencing ATA-8 ACS is correct
for Protocol Identifiers. Perhaps ATA-8 AAM should be
referenced instead, but there is no ISO/IEC project for
ATA-8 AAM.
Until an appropriate normative reference can be identified,
I have left the SPC-4 Protocol Identifiers table unmodified.
All the best,
.Ralph
*
* 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