Motion P1788.1/M001.02: No
Since we are voting on the actual wording, I vote "NO."
Absolutely the only thing to which I object is the
non-normative part where "natural interval extension"
is defined. I realize this is a bit of quibbling and
will not affect what the standard actually is, but I think
changing it will avoid future confusion in the literature.
I think Vladik et al have already come up with some
alternate terms that could serve better.
Sincerely,
Baker
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ralph Baker Kearfott, rbk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (337) 482-5346 (fax)
(337) 482-5270 (work) (337) 993-1827 (home)
URL: http://interval.louisiana.edu/kearfott.html
Department of Mathematics, University of Louisiana at Lafayette
(Room 217 Maxim D. Doucet Hall, 1403 Johnston Street)
Box 4-1010, Lafayette, LA 70504-1010, USA
---------------------------------------------------------------