Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[C++17 DIS comment 020] Use of "this International Standard" #1732

Closed
zygoloid opened this issue Sep 6, 2017 · 4 comments
Closed

[C++17 DIS comment 020] Use of "this International Standard" #1732

zygoloid opened this issue Sep 6, 2017 · 4 comments
Labels
ballot-comment Response to an NB or ISO comment on a ballot
Milestone

Comments

@zygoloid
Copy link
Member

zygoloid commented Sep 6, 2017

Suggestion: reject. We have already changed the places where "this document" does not create an ambiguity or confusion.

@zygoloid zygoloid added the ballot-comment Response to an NB or ISO comment on a ballot label Sep 6, 2017
@zygoloid zygoloid modified the milestone: C++17 IS Sep 6, 2017
@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Sep 7, 2017

Agreed.

@zygoloid
Copy link
Member Author

Looks like there are still a lot of "this International Standard"s left that would be better as "this document". Proposal: use "this document" when referring to the body of text, "this International Standard" when referring to the IS in comparison to other revisions of the C++ standard or in reference to the standardization process (eg, "reserved for use by future versions of this International Standard" or "C++ 2003 did it some other way, but in this International Standard, we...").

To review: #1748

@zygoloid
Copy link
Member Author

That would make this ACCEPTED WITH MODIFICATION. "This International Standard" has been replaced by "this document" when referring to the body of text, but has been left as-is when referring to the IS in comparison to other revisions of the C++ standard, as changing those instances to "this document" would create confusion and ambiguity.

@zygoloid
Copy link
Member Author

Merged, and submitted as 6218c21 in master. I think we may have reached a new low with this one, in going with a resolution that literally no-one is happy with. But hopefully ISO will not complain.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ballot-comment Response to an NB or ISO comment on a ballot
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants