the best way forward

It seems there are some areas of the guidelines which need work.

3.6, 3.7, 5.3, 14.2 have all been pointed at as giving the wrong
message. The question is what to do.

I think some of these can be dealt with rapidly by giving
interpretation in the techniques document - that was one of the reasons
for keeping it out of the recommendation. However I think these
checkpoints should be re-written for greater clarity in a version 1.1
as soon as is practical.

The case of 14.2 -illustrate appropriately... is different. At this
stage I agree with Jonathan that the priority of this guideline is too
low. I think the only good way to change it is to release a version 1.1
as a recommendation. A possible alternative is an erratum. The reason I
prefer a new version is that I think this checkpoint belongs in
guideline 1.

so I am in favour of clarifying points in the techniques, and if
necessary of issuing an errata, but I think our main goal must be to
produce a new version based on implementation experience. The challenge
is to ensure we have sufficient experience to get it right, while not
taking so long that it becomes irrelevant.

cheers

CharlesMcCN

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Received on Thursday, 8 July 1999 06:04:12 UTC