Eliot,
This makes sense to me, but since I don't want to update too often, can you
ignore this issue for now and comment on the rest of the draft, which is quite
a bit different from before?
Regards/Ngā mihi
Brian
On 05-Jun-26 20:02, Eliot Lear wrote:
Just to follow this up:
My recommendation is a placeholder in the text to allow for circumscribing of
where any differences are discovered. I think that turns into a simple table
for working purposes, and then we can go through, streams and all, to see what
variance is required, and to see where convergence can be found.
Again, the less variance, the better it is for the reader.
Eliot
On 05.06.2026 09:41, Eliot Lear wrote:
Brian,
What we have is an untested claim that there is any sort of variation across
the streams. The streams are well represented both here and in the RSAB.
Please revert.
Eliot
On 05.06.2026 09:13, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
On 05-Jun-26 18:56, Eliot Lear wrote:
On 05.06.2026 06:52, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Adjusted scope such that each stream may explicitly accept these guidelines and
define exceptions and variations
This vitiates the document. With that statement I see no point of publication.
Well, we can debate that - it wasn't my original idea, as you know. Speaking
for myself, I'd prefer s/may/should/. Or maybe s/may/is expected to/.
Brian
--
rswg mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
