Dear @zlaus, @erget, @davidhassell et al. Thanks for the [PR](https://urldefense.us/v3/__https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/pull/344__;!!G2kpM7uM-TzIFchu!nCorpr1w3xsiQ29-ZyQWgmXIFudxCW5wd2GqSaOFhrXPhujPZREoH3m0_nr7RyAKYpj6ZWWJJgg$ ), Klaus. I agree that you've provided a neat solution, as Daniel says in other words.
I agree with renaming the top-level anchor of the conformance document. It's probably more useful if generic anyway. I note that you have helpfully made this change in an example in ch7. Is this the _only_ example in the whole document which includes the `Conventions` attribute? If so, it would be easier to delete it in that example, and that would also be better for consistency. Daniel suggests defining `current-version` to `1.10 draft`, not just `1.10`, until it's released. I think that's a good idea. It means that `draft` would automatically appear in the titles of both conventions and conformance documents. This procedure should be added to the release checklist, if there is one. Is there a reason why we should not release 1.10 with this change as soon as we've agreed it, and any others agreed since 1.9, and then start preparing 1.11 for release in the summer? Cheers Jonathan -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://urldefense.us/v3/__https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/issues/343*issuecomment-1005741937__;Iw!!G2kpM7uM-TzIFchu!nCorpr1w3xsiQ29-ZyQWgmXIFudxCW5wd2GqSaOFhrXPhujPZREoH3m0_nr7RyAKYpj6Ta9f8_0$ You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: <cf-convention/cf-conventions/issues/343/1005741...@github.com> This list forwards relevant notifications from Github. It is distinct from cf-metad...@cgd.ucar.edu, although if you do nothing, a subscription to the UCAR list will result in a subscription to this list. To unsubscribe from this list only, send a message to cf-metadata-unsubscribe-requ...@listserv.llnl.gov.
