ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: About referenced documents...

2007-10-31 19:26:09
"Brian" == Brian E Carpenter 
<brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> writes:

Brian> On 2007-11-01 12:08, lconroy wrote:
Hi Tom, folks,
Many thanks for that. This is exactly what I wanted to know.
I understand that this is a distraction from the wider IPR crusade,
but I wonder if people should consider ensuring that our standards
refer to just this kind of open document (e.g. refer to SUS/opengroup
standards rather than the original POSIX/IEEE standards).

Brian> But what if the freely available document is slightly out of date
Brian> or slightly different compared to the official one? That isn't a sound
Brian> basis for a normative reference. In such a case, I would consider
Brian> a normative reference to the official (paid) standard and an informative
Brian> reference to the free one, with a warning.

My understanding is that the Open Group / SUS standards are supposed
to be technically and textually identical to the IEEE 1003.x
standards, or at least, a strict superset thereof.  If someone has
evidence to the contrary, I would like to know about it.

---Tom

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf