To: J3                                                     J3/23-138r1
From: Malcolm Cohen
Subject: Responses to **-007, 011, 014, 016, 017, 019, 021, 027, 052.
Date: 2023-February-22


1. Introduction

These comments are mostly rejected.


2. Comments and responses

**-007 "Self-referencing is not allowed in a definition.
        Several definitions refer to "this document"; e.g.
        3.93, 3.93.1, 3.93.2, 3.133, 3.148.8

Reject. These are not "self-references", that is, the terms are not
referencing themselves. Whether some concept or feature is defined by
this standard is an essential part of those definitions, which make
sense as they are, and would not if "this document" were removed.

The ISO directives do not prohibit use of "this document" in definitions.

**-011 "Circular definitions, which repeat the term being defined,
        are not allowed."
       "If a definition is circular, it means that the term is self-
        explanatory and that there is no need for a definition."

Reject. These are not circular definitions, they are recursive.
The recursion is unbounded but finite.

As the terms are not circular, but recursive, they are in no sense
self-explanatory, and the definition is needed.

**-014 "The boilerplate text in Claus 3 has been updated.
        Please use the new boilerplate text"

Accepted - there was a missing "s".

[3:5] Clause 3 boilerplate, "http:" -> "https:".

**-016 "The format of the term entry is incorrect"

Reject. The format is correct as is - "Not a Number" is not a defined term
but an explanatory part of the definition.

**-017 "In 3.114 "not completely specified in this document" cannot be in
        the definition."

Reject. That is the very definition of the term. It is not the term that is
not completely specified in the document, but the features to which the
term applies.

**-019 "The font size is incorrect"

Reject. This font size is used in the document to indicate obsolescent
features, and thus has technical meaning.

The Working Group will investigate suitable alternative means of indicating
obsolescence in a future revision.

**-021 3.44 "Why is there '(R927)' at the beginning of the definition?"
            "Please delete or move to note to entry."

It is there because that is the syntax rule that defines the syntax of a
cosubscript. This will be made into a note to entry.

[8:24,24+] 3.44 cosubscript
           Delete "(R927)" before "scalar integer".
           Append
    "Note 1 to entry: The syntax of a cosubscript is specified by the BNF
     rule \si{cosubscript} (R927)."

**-027 "5.5.7 missing reference"

The reference was not missing from the submitted DIS,
document ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 22/WG 5/N2209.

**-052 "Please use the foreword sent to you via email"

The foreword used was the most recent one received.

===END===