>>>>> "Brian" == Brian E Carpenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 But what if the freely available document is slightly out of date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
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Reply via email to