Re: [xcbf] Ballot failed, or new version started? Who has approvedthe version 2 draft?

["Phillip H. Griffin" <phil.griffin@asn-1.com>]

John,

Your anger seems to have clouded your memory.

The earliest use of the term EXTENDED-XER on this list is in the
ballot comments I posted April 2 of this year - See
 http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xcbf/200304/msg00001.html

These ballot comments were made on the current XCBF CS 1.0,
which uses in one place the term VXER.

This term was what I was requested to use by the ASN.1 Standards
Editor, Paul Thorpe in Baltimore, December 2002.

Through several ballots and a thirty day public review period, not
once did any member in the ASN.1 Group tell TC that the term VXER
had been changed.

This term no longer appears in the last document proposed as an XCBF
CS, which is now our current XCBF v 2.0 draft.

Phil



John Larmouth wrote:

> Phillip H. Griffin wrote:
>
>> VXER is still the term used in the current CS.
>
>
> Phil,
>
> As you know, there are times I get VERY angry with you!  I know that 
> anger is bad.
>
> But you have been told many times that this is an archaic term, and 
> has been replaced by EXTENDED-XER, yet you refuse to change it.  Why 
> on earth do you insist on continuing to use it?  This is just a naming 
> issue.  You need to get your text right (and your e-mails).
>
> You need an Editor to help you that knows about ASN.1!  I nominate 
> Paul Thorpe.
>
> John L
>
>
>