[step-manufacturing] [wg11] Latest draft of Part 21 Edition 3 ready for quality checks

[Martin Hardwick]

Hi Tom,

Thanks very much for this list of issues.

I believe they have all been addressed in the new version that has been 
posted to the web site.

http://www.steptools.com/library/standard/p21e3_dis_paris.html

Martin

On 6/24/2013 5:11 PM, Thomas Thurman wrote:
> Martin,
> Comments below.
> Tom
>
> 1-Line 130 should be clause 3.5.
> 2-"Anchor and reference section encodings" (current 6.6) should precede "anchor section encoding" (current 6.5).
> 3-line 661 'term' should be 'terms'.
> 4-line 699 'terms' should be 'term'.
> 5-line 743 definition appears to be obsolete as anchor covers more than entity instances?
> 6-line 774 definition also appears to need updating.
> 7-line 1581: "..The integer spaces for the two types of names cannot overlap" would be clearer as "The integer spaces for the two types of names are not permitted to overlap"
> 8 clause 6.4.4.2 Value names: I could find no examples in annex K. Be more specific as to the location of the example.
>
> 9-6.5.2 EXPRESS constant. An example showing the use of the object identifier to represent schema version would be useful to include here. (see also 9.2.7)
>
> line 2282: the following is ambiguous:
> If a time stamp is included and its value describes a date and time after the date and time in the file_name of the header of the referenced exchange structure, then the referenced exchange structure has not been changed since this time stamp was created.
> replace with
> If a time stamp is included and its value describes a date and time after the date and time in the file_name of the header of the referenced exchange structure, then the referenced exchange structure has not been changed since this exchange structure was created.
>
> line 2313: "data and time" should be "date and time"
>
> line 2317: The clause "validity of the time_stamp_text in the referenced file" is undefined.
>
>   clause 9.2.4: change the note into an example. There are no guarantees that a future version of the exchange structure will have the missing data.
>
> clause 10.1: It appears that a value_instance can be declared only in a reference section. It would be best to make that explicit, if true.
>
> clause H.4 The note should explain why the exchange structure is conformant to conformance option {4,1}.
>
> =======end comments========
>> On Jun 21, 2013, at 4:16 PM6/21/13, Martin Hardwick wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> A new draft of Part 21 Edition 3 has been posted to the web site: http://www.steptools.com/library/standard/p21e3_dis_paris.html
>>
>> This draft is believed to be complete and will be submitted to ISO as soon as the necessary quality checks have been completed.
>>
>> Therefore, if you find any errors it is because they were missed, not because we have not yet gotten to them, so please let us know.
>>
>> Martin Hardwick
>> Editor Part 21 Edition 3
>> _______________________________________________
>> wg11 mailing list
>> wg11 at steptools.com
>> http://lists.steptools.com/mailman/listinfo/wg11
>
>
> !DSPAM:14,51c8b5fb279622083314589!
>