Hi Bharat, On 6/12/13 11:06 AM, Bharat Joshi wrote:
Thanks for your reply.While reading, I felt that adding a 'to' here make things more clearer.
It does make things clearer, but the original wording is correct.
As you mentioned that the existing one is correct, so its ok.
I believe that holds for all three errata opened on this document. Unless someone objects, I will mark all three (3647, 3648, & 3649) as "Rejected".
Regards, Brian
