Re: Spec column in SCXML IRP table

Just to be clear: it=92s not only the manifest.xml but the =93Spec=94 colum=
n in the table on the HTML page as well.

Sorry to nitpick
  Stefan

On Nov 11, 2014, at 15:37, Jim Barnett <[email protected]> wrote:

> Ah, yes, you're right.  I forgot to edit the manifest.xml.  It should be =
fixed now.
>=20
> - Jim
> On 11/11/2014 6:37 AM, Stefan Radomski wrote:
>> On Nov 7, 2014, at 13:58, Jim Barnett <[email protected]> wrote:
>>=20
>>> Yes, that's because I moved the algorithm later in the Appendices. It i=
s now Appendix D, while it was A before.  So all Appendices  before D have =
moved up a letter.
>>>=20
>> I am sure that=92s true, nevertheless, this makes the =93Spec=94 column =
in the IRP table incorrect for quite a few tests :)
>>=20
>> E.g. test436.txml is not testing a functional requirement from C.1 as in=
dicated in the table and the manifest from the IRP page, but from B.1. It=
=92s no big deal, the references still point to the correct section as the =
anchors are still correct, however, the section these anchors appear under =
are not correctly labeled.
>>=20
>> Regards
>> Stefan
>>=20
>>> - Jim
>>>=20
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Stefan Radomski [mailto:[email protected]]
>>> Sent: Friday, November 07, 2014 3:24 AM
>>> To: [email protected] ([email protected])
>>> Subject: Spec column in SCXML IRP table
>>>=20
>>> Hey there,
>>>=20
>>> Datamodels and IO Processors are shifted by one alphabet character in t=
he "Spec" column on the IRP page. Datamodels are "B", not "C" and IO proces=
sors are "C", not "D".
>>> Stefan
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>=20
>=20
>=20