------=_NextPart_000_0081_01BF1BBE.FFB76B10
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The advice I received from the IEEE on the issue of optional levels of =
compliance/conformance WRT the PLI being part of 1076 is from Jim Moore =
(our SVWG mentor on RevCom). He stated:
"The POSIX standards provide examples of optional conformance.=20
The basic idea is that you can have optional portions of the standard. =
The standard should include a section describing the different claims =
of=20
conformity that one is allowed to make. Any claim of conformity should =
state which options are included and which are not."
Therefore, we can keep the PLI as part of 1076 as originally planned. =
Also, Mr. Moore's comments would indicate that we can have levels of =
compliance within the PLI in addition to making the entire PLI optional =
for compliant implementations.
Paul, can you please look into how this is handled in POSIX (at your =
convenience) as you are both the 1076 and PLI editor. Let Francoise and =
I know if you find anything that you think would cause difficulty.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Bailey
Staff Corporate Applications Engineer
Synopsys Inc.
sbailey@synopsys.com
303-588-2001 (voice/mobile)
650-584-4893 (voice)
----------------------------------------------------------
------=_NextPart_000_0081_01BF1BBE.FFB76B10
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
"The = POSIX standards=20 provide examples of optional conformance.
The basic idea is = that you=20 can have optional portions of the standard.
The standard should = include a=20 section describing the different claims of
conformity that one is = allowed=20 to make. Any claim of conformity should
state which options are = included=20 and which are not."