On Wed, 7 Oct 1998 16:50:34 -0400, you wrote: >When the notion of CTR21 was launched, I happened to be visiting Peter >Krisor the chair of TRAC at that time, in Bonn. All the things people are >saying about CTR21 he predicted at the time. The issue is that we must >start making sharp distinctions between the uses of documents. CTR21 was a >compromise towards the lowest common denominator from conception. It was >the only way forward and therefore, in my opinion, the right thing to do, >if a lousy specification.
>etc. etc. Well stated Vic I totally agree and have been giving out very similar advise to anyone asking my opinion. It has also been suggested that the advisory noes (EG 201 121: A Guide To Application To TBR21) should be considered when designing products. Again this is fair comment, but equipment designed to meet relevant ITU-T, ETSI and ANSI standards should ensure quality and compatible product. TBR21 is a lousy specification, but it serves a purpose and is infinitely better than the painful route of national specifications. Regards Steve Wallace BABT Product Service
