[sc34wg3] Editorial structure of N0396

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* Sam Hunting
| 
| N0396 ("the draft", or the "SAM") in its present form evidences its
| potential status as part of a larger, complete standard.[1] There
| are a number of requirements for ISO standards, which could be met
| by other parts of a complete replacement draft for ISO 13250 but are
| not present in the draft.
| [...]
| "Together with" implies that N0396 is to be a standards document,
| complete in and of itself. The informal "road map" agrees. However,
| "part of the new ISO 13250 standard" implies the opposite. We have
| chosen this second alternative since that is consistent with N0396
| as delivered, and assumed that N0396 is indeed designed as part of a
| single, larger standard that is to replace ISO 13250.

What we all agreed was that we would make ISO 13250 a multi-part
standard. How you can interpret the SAM as saying otherwise is beyond
me, but I can assure you that that is not the intention of the authors.
You may want to update your review based on this.
 
| It should be noted that ISO procedures require that the SC not be
| involved in re-writing drafts to conform to ISO requirements and at
| a minimum, the current draft would require re-writing in its
| entirety to reach conformance with ISO requirements.

Yes. The text even says as much. The thinking has been to resolve the
remaining issues in London, then edit those resolutions in, and at the
same time rewrite the text to proper ISO style. It will then be ready
for committee draft status.
 
| 2. Labeling of N0396
| 
| N0396 is labeled as a "Committee Draft," an inadvertent error since
| Committee Drafts require a vote of the committee before reaching that
| status.

Yes.
 
| As part of the committee work on N0396, instances where the draft
| varies in terms of self-reference -- sometimes saying it is a
| Technical Specification (2.2), sometimes a Standard (3.4), and
| sometimes both (6) -- should be noted and carefully corrected. Both
| "standard" and "technical specification" are terms of art within ISO
| and carry a particular significance to standards bodies. The next
| draft should resolve these discrepancies.

Thank you. These were editorial slips. Now corrected. (We hope to
remove many of the self-references when doing the rewrite, by the
way.)
 
| 4. ISO Requirements and N0396
| 
| 4.1 N0396 needs a Scope clause which states the limits of its
| applicability.
| 
| 4.2 N0396 needs a Foreword clause which states the significant technical
| changes from its previous edition. (The Abstract in the N0396 is not
| entirely clear on which parts are being caneled or replaced.)
| 
| 4.3 The References section of N0396 should follow ISO practice. (The
| normative status of the current References clause is not clear.)
| 
| 4.4 The Terminology section of N0396 should be completed and converted to
| a normative glossary that follows ISO practice for terms and definitions.
| 
| 4.5 Figures in N0396 should be numbered and designated for reference
| following ISO practice.

Thank you for listing these requirements.

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
GSM: +47 98 21 55 50                  <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >