Re: An error in Section 14.4 of the final draft
On Sat, 5 Jul 2014 13:02:46 +0200, Vincent Lefèvre replied back:
> Then it should be rephrased to avoid the ambiguous "for ... for ...".
This is about the new 5th paragraph of 14.4 -- so how about:
The interchange Level 4 encoding of a compressed interval
(when supported) is as follows: a non-empty compressed interval
is represented as described above for bare intervals, and a
decoration is represented as a pair of floating-point datums...
> > > - Replace "no payload information" by "ignoring the payload"?
> > No -- I'm elaborating on what I mean by "generic NaN".
>
> This should really be clarified because at Level 4, a NaN has a
> payload, so that this seems contradictory.
I did not say "no payload" -- I said "no payload information". Perhaps
we should simply say "NaN"? But I wanted to stress that the interchange
format explicitly avoids using the NaN payload to convey information.
> > > - "There is therefore a need to" -> "It is therefore needed to"?
> > To me, "it is needed to" is pretty awkward.
>
> Well, "it is needed to" has 1 billion occurrences on Google.
With "it" as a dummy subject? The expression is perfectly fine when "it"
refers to an actual subject.
In any case, these stylistic fixes are not urgent -- we should keep track
of them and deal with them at a later stage. I don't think we need to hold
up presenting what we have to the MSC. Baker, George, John, Christian?
(Of course, if the next three days bring a flood of reversed votes...)
Michel.
---Sent: 2014-07-05 16:34:29 UTC