On 30/05/2017 06:51, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> >> -7, Grasp Message and Options table: Why "Standards Action"? Would you
> >> expect some harm to be done if this were only Spec Required?
>
> > Personal opinion: I see potential for harm. I could imagine
> On May 28, 2017, at 10:59 PM, Brian E Carpenter
> wrote:
>
> On 23/05/2017 13:25, Ben Campbell wrote:
> ...
>> -7, Grasp Message and Options table: Why "Standards Action"? Would you
>> expect some harm to be done if this were only Spec Required?
>
> Personal opinion: I see potential for harm
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> -7, Grasp Message and Options table: Why "Standards Action"? Would you
>> expect some harm to be done if this were only Spec Required?
> Personal opinion: I see potential for harm. I could imagine that if
> GRASP is a success, then with experience we m
On 23/05/2017 13:25, Ben Campbell wrote:
...
> -7, Grasp Message and Options table: Why "Standards Action"? Would you
> expect some harm to be done if this were only Spec Required?
Personal opinion: I see potential for harm. I could imagine that if
GRASP is a success, then with experience we might