On Sun Jan 29 2017 16:57:36, mark lewis wrote to Nicholas Boel:
NB>> Yes. FTS-0001 is wrong in this regard. So since I'm supposed to NB>> reference FTS-0001, I did.
ml> where does it say that you are supposed to do that?? just like ml> expiration tags on your toes, there's nothing in the FTSC that says ml> you have to reference FTS-0001... this document is a clarification of ml> all three packets and how their data is different... if stephen has ml> his document completed with the last round of adjustments, perhaps you ml> could get that from him and present it instead of wading into all of ml> this again and changing it from what he had done with all of his work ml> on it...
I was just told by three people in this echo that I should, and that ABNF should not be used at all.
I posted his latest (which was the FIRST draft #3 posted in this echo) with all the fixes you and him worked on a year ago. Once I posted it all the ABNF referencing became confusing to a few people in this echo and they all suggested referencing FTS-0001 instead.
NB>> I don't suppose I can change this proposal to reflect anything NB>> else until FTS-0001 is corrected, then?
ml> since randy bush has refused to give up his copyright on FTS-0001, it ml> won't ever be updated but that doesn't mean that other documentation ml> has to also be wrong... hell, look at what FSC-0048 does to ml> FSC-0039... there are other similar documents that also give hints and ml> perspectives on ways to work with different documents that may appear ml> to have conflicting information...
That sure as hell didn't seem to be possible here in this echo. Even the FTSC coordinator gave me said advice I mentioned above. *shrug*
I still have the original document here, unmodified. Draft #4 could easily be deleted, but it doesn't seem like a few here would accept the original (one of them being the FTSC chair and the host of the document website).
So what do you do then?
Regards, Nick
... "Не знаю. Я здесь только работаю." --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20161221 * Origin: thePharcyde_ distribution system (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)
