Regarding FC094, I think we agreed to keep the extra granularity here also. A gateway can easily map enumerator 0 to false and 1, 2 and 3 to true.

 

Roger

 

From: SAC-PDG-RPR: Rene Verhage [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: dinsdag 30 april 2013 12:49
Subject: FOM issues Status Report

 

From: "Rene Verhage" ([log in to unmask])

*** This message was generated from SAC-PDG-RPR ***

Please find attached the status of the FOM issues as per the discussions of the meeting from April 25th.

Note that I left comment FC094 open as I don't remember exactly the outcome (sorry...). I think to remember that we agreed to the SR. However, given that I do remember the outcome of FC080 and FC081, where we agreed to keep the existing, more detailed capabilities in the RPR FOM, I am not sure anymore whether or not we agreed to remove the extra granularity for this case. I propose to discuss this again in the next meeting where we discuss the FOM issues.

Note also that I used an additional background color. The purple color indicates issues to be discussed within the group the next time, whereas the orange color is used for issues agreed upon and are yet to be incorporated in the next FOM (draft) release.

-- Attachment: RPR FOM 2.0 Status Report-2013_04_30d(1).xls

To reply: [log in to unmask]
To start a new topic: [log in to unmask]
To view discussion: http://discussions.sisostds.org/threadview.aspx?fid%9&threadidS582#83803

To (un)subscribe: Send a message to [log in to unmask] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Important: the unsubscribe email needs to be in plain text format, and needs to have no subject line.

SISO: http://www.sisostds.org/

 

This e-mail and its contents are subject to the DISCLAIMER at http://www.tno.nl/emaildisclaimer



To unsubscribe from the SAC-PDG-RPR list, click the following link:
https://discussions.sisostds.org/index.htm?SUBED1=SAC-PDG-RPR