Re: Motion 31
On 2012-04-03 22:29:05 -0500, Ralph Baker Kearfott wrote:
> Ulrich et al,
>
> We can take your notational comments into consideration when
> writing the actual standards text. Also, it is in general a good
> idea to use our agreed upon notation in position papers. However,
> I view motion 31, as a position paper, as providing guidance
> for actual writing the standards text, so the meaning in motion 31 is
> what is of primary importance. That is, even if Motion 31 passes,
> we can still use your notation in the text.
I agree. If I understand correctly, Motion 31 is about Level 1 text
(Section 5). Sections 3 and 4 are there for the context (to be able
to understand Section 5).
--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@xxxxxxxxxx> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)