From owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org  Thu Aug 23 17:07:48 2007
Return-Path: <owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org>
X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom6
Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom6@open-std.org
Received: by open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521)
	id AACB7DA195; Thu, 23 Aug 2007 17:07:48 +0200 (CET DST)
X-Original-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Received: from oin.rl.ac.uk (oin.rl.ac.uk [130.246.135.200])
	by open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0E0355CE
	for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Thu, 23 Aug 2007 17:07:13 +0200 (CET DST)
X-RAL-MFrom: <j.k.reid@rl.ac.uk>
X-RAL-Connect: <jkr.cse.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.202]>
Received: from jkr.cse.rl.ac.uk (jkr.cse.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.202])
	by oin.rl.ac.uk (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l7NF76G2004506
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Thu, 23 Aug 2007 16:07:06 +0100
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by jkr.cse.rl.ac.uk (8.12.10/8.12.8) with ESMTP id l7NF75wF031943;
	Thu, 23 Aug 2007 16:07:05 +0100
Message-ID: <46CDA299.3020601@rl.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 16:07:05 +0100
From: John Reid <j.k.reid@rl.ac.uk>
Reply-To: j.k.reid@rl.ac.uk
Organization: Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20060209 Fedora/1.7.12-1.1.2.legacy
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Sally Seitz <SSeitz@ansi.org>
CC: WG5 <sc22wg5@open-std.org>
Subject: Re: WG 5 Request for Additional Corrigendum
References: <FEEA109B01A4D7118B6000D0B7C9E30608B9EAD7@email1.ansi.org>
In-Reply-To: <FEEA109B01A4D7118B6000D0B7C9E30608B9EAD7@email1.ansi.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-CCLRC-SPAM-report: 0 : 
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.39
Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org
Precedence: bulk

Sally Seitz wrote:
> Hi John
> 
> Thanks for the update.  Since neither John Hill or myself could find 
> anything in the Directives prohibiting this (and Lisa agrees with our 
> interpretation), I think you can go ahead with a corrigendum without a 
> resolution from SC 22. 

Excellent! We are not ready yet, but should be before the end of the year.

I plan away to raise the matter when I report to SC22, to make sure that 
everyone is aware of this ruling.

Thanks,

John.


