I see where Peter is coming from, however, as I understand the standard at present, I would agree with Simon.
My view is that there are four categories of interpretation of the standard.
1. ERROR.
It is deviant from the standard and will cause interoperability issues, IE, this issue.
2. WARINING.
It is deveiant from the standard but should have minimal impact on operability, IE declaring a mandatory parameter.
3. ADVISORY
It is not covered by the standard but is likley to cause problems, IE a sensor temperature out side of the stated scale range.
4. COMPLIANT
On Peters proposal, an alternative ACK would be required, however, I wouldn't want to confuse that point with the issue of complinace.
As discussed at large at the last CPWG, a universal test standard has to be the way forwards. Anything that brings up a category 1 result should be declaired incompatible.
|