From owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Fri Sep 5 00:27:26 2003 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) id h84MRQKj020904 for sc22wg5-domo; Fri, 5 Sep 2003 00:27:26 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk) X-Authentication-Warning: ptah.dkuug.dk: majordom set sender to owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk using -f Received: from envelope.rose-hulman.edu (envelope.rose-hulman.edu [137.112.8.21]) by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) with ESMTP id h84MRDCp020897 for ; Fri, 5 Sep 2003 00:27:22 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from north@rose-hulman.edu) Received: from NORTH2 (12-159-196-105.joink.com [12.159.196.105] (may be forged)) (authenticated (0 bits)) by envelope.rose-hulman.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h84MRBj10072 (using TLSv1/SSLv3 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128 bits) verified NO) for ; Thu, 4 Sep 2003 17:27:17 -0500 (EST) From: "C Mallory North" To: Subject: RE: (SC22WG5.2974) Question about paragraph numbers Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 17:27:09 -0500 Message-ID: <000501c37333$b224fa40$6401a8c0@ms.rosehulman.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 In-Reply-To: <200309042149.h84LnVk1020507@dkuug.dk> Sender: owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Precedence: bulk It may be unambiguous, but it sure is messy, possibly confusing, and unnecessary. In my opinion (for what little it is worth) we should forget about paragraph numbering. Mallory North -----Original Message----- From: owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk [mailto:owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk] On Behalf Of Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 4:49 PM To: sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Subject: (SC22WG5.2974) Question about paragraph numbers I understand we're not allowed to have more than one numbered list per subclause, because a reference like "Item (3) in the list in 16.2" is ambiguous. Assuming we can legally use paragraph numbers, and assuming a list is part of a paragraph, not that each item is a separate paragraph, does that mean we can legally have more than one numbered list in a subclause? Assuming the notation for a paragraph is subclause#/paragraph#, and that we continue to use (item#) for item references, [406:16] would be 16.2/2(3), which is unambiguous. -- Van Snyder | What fraction of Americans believe Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov | Wrestling is real and NASA is fake? Any alleged opinions are my own and have not been approved or disapproved by JPL, CalTech, NASA, Sean O'Keefe, George Bush, the Pope, or anybody else.