>>>>> "Brian" == Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> writes: Brian> On 2007-11-01 12:08, lconroy wrote: >> Hi Tom, folks, >> Many thanks for that. This is exactly what I wanted to know. >> I understand that this is a distraction from the wider IPR crusade, >> but I wonder if people should consider ensuring that our standards >> refer to just this kind of open document (e.g. refer to SUS/opengroup >> standards rather than the original POSIX/IEEE standards). Brian> But what if the freely available document is slightly out of date Brian> or slightly different compared to the official one? That isn't a sound Brian> basis for a normative reference. In such a case, I would consider Brian> a normative reference to the official (paid) standard and an informative Brian> reference to the free one, with a warning. My understanding is that the Open Group / SUS standards are supposed to be technically and textually identical to the IEEE 1003.x standards, or at least, a strict superset thereof. If someone has evidence to the contrary, I would like to know about it. ---Tom _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf