Andrew Pham wrote: > Since we received different pointers as to which standard to take as the > base reference, at different stages of our > 'documenting-included-interfaces' endeavor ; we would like to post the > exact order in which we look up stuffs. First, to make sure that we are > going down the right path; and second, so that anyone who has any other > suggestion/feedback; please lets us know. > > ORDER OF PRECIDENCE and LOOK-UP for a BASE-REFERENCE : > ( for reference and compare) > > 1) ISO-C99 (pay preview) > 2)SUSv3 www.opengroup.org/austin/ > 3)SUSv2 http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/7908799/xshix.html > ...
IMHO it's not right for the LSB to reference any pay-per-view standard like ISO-C99. ESPECIALLY as the first standard in the list! Can we demote ISO-C99 to be further down in the list, or preferably, delete it entirely from the list? Thanks, Dan
