Re: Notes on SpecGL discussions [DRAFT]

At 11:19 AM 7/25/02 -0400, David Marston/Cambridge/IBM wrote:
>[...]
>I propose that checkpoint 5.4 be dropped, and the explanatory verbiage
>be moved over to 10.1, which currently has no such verbiage. Of course,
>the second sentence, a mere cross-reference from Ck 5.4 to GL 10, should
>be dropped. Once that's done, GL 5 will focus on the establishment of a
>policy, while GL 10 will focus on the documentation of it.

An interesting twist came to mind as I was implementing this.  It will be 
tricky to verify the GL5 checkpoints, or even talk about verification, 
without mentioning documentation.  I suppose that we can take the attitude 
in GL5 of "somewhere and somehow", and supply specifics in GL10 ("in the 
conformance clause").

-Lofton.