<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-GB link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Hi John et al,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>It seems to me that this problem applies across the board to potentially all books produced in CCSDS. For example in CSTS, SLE APIs are built on the basis of a particular set of specifications and it takes time and additional funding to catch up with new versions of the SLE transfer specs. There can be problems if users and providers use APIs that use different versions of the reference documents. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Perhaps the register that the CCSDS Secretariat maintain should be expanded to include a list or table showing which versions of the reference documents are valid with a particular version of a CCSDS specification? Lists or tables could be maintained by the relevant WG. This would provide positive guidance to users rather than inviting them to work out for themselves which version of a reference document they should use. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>In the meantime, I think your proposed text addresses the issue for the one document you are considering at the moment.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Best regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Hugh<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> CSS-CSTS [mailto:css-csts-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>John Pietras<br><b>Sent:</b> 30 May 2019 21:15<br><b>To:</b> CCSDS_CSTSWG (css-csts@mailman.ccsds.org); Wolfgang Hell<br><b>Subject:</b> [Css-csts] Required version of SFW for CSTSes<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>CSTSWG colleagues ---<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>At the spring workshop we discussed the misleading nature of the CCSDS-standard “boilerplate” text for the (normative) References subsection of section 1, which reads:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>“The following publications contain provisions which, through reference in this text, constitute provisions of this document. At the time of publication, the editions indicated were valid. All publications are subject to revision, and users of this document are encouraged to investigate the possibility of applying the most recent editions of the publications indicated below. The CCSDS Secretariat maintains a register of currently valid CCSDS publications.”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>The problem with this text is that it implies that if a later version of a the CSTS SFW (the most important of the referenced documents), an implementer may attempt to use that later version. But a given version (issue) of a CSTS Blue Book may use only the specific version of the SAFW upon which that version of the CSTS was developed. This is a concern for all CSTSes, not just Forward Frame.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>As part of the resolution of pseudo-RID JP-7 (Require Specific Issue of the SFW) I have modified the boilerplate text in an attempt to make this point. I see that Wolfgang has taken an action to produce similar text for the TD-book – I don’t know if he has done anything about this yet. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Obviously we should use the same modified boilerplate in all CSTS books (another Guideline! :-) ). Here is what I have written as a starting point. I am not strongly attached to it and would welcome any improvements [modifications are in <span style='color:red'>red</span>]:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>“The following publications contain provisions which, through reference in this text, constitute provisions of this document. At the time of publication, the editions indicated were valid. <span style='color:red'>It is important to note that the edition of the <i>Cross Support Transfer Service—Specification Framework</i> that is named in reference [1]</span></span><span lang=EN-US style='color:red'> is the only edition that can be used as a source of requirements for this edition of the Forward Frame service Recommended Standard</span><span lang=EN-US>. </span><span lang=EN-US>All <span style='color:red'>other</span> publications in the list are subject to revision, and users of this document are encouraged to investigate the possibility of applying the most recent editions of the publications <span style='color:red'>(other than the Specification Framework)</span> indicated below. The CCSDS Secretariat maintains a register of currently valid CCSDS publications.”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Best regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>John<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></body></html>