On 20/06/2018 14:42, Andrew Kirkpatrick wrote: > Jon, > > Thanks for sharing this. Am I misreading it or is the author suggesting > that the 2.1 SC are replacing 2.0 SC? No, more the opposite, a la "if you want to flag failures of 2.1 SCs, but you're still stuck with reporting against 2.0, here's the SCs where you can cram those failures in". I think it's an interesting idea, but quite flawed. Commented as such (e.g. how is a failure of 1.3.4 orientation in any way related to 1.3.1 info and relationships?) P -- Patrick H. Lauke www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_laukeReceived on Wednesday, 20 June 2018 14:23:45 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:08:26 UTC