[CESG] Reconfirmation Review due date vs. date of last Corrigemdum

Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int
Fri Apr 7 07:52:09 UTC 2017

"Shames, Peter M (312B)" <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov> wrote on 06/04/2017 

> I'll also point out to Tom that it's a little confusing to track in 
> this table what the real "reconfirmation review" date is when there 
> have been corrigenda applied.  I suggest that the most current 
> reconfirmation review date should be shown for the parent document, 
> but updated to align with the most recent corrigendum.  When we 
> download a document by number we get the latest, with Corrigenda 
> applied, so that's really the relevant date for the document.  It's 
> a twiddle to the table, but a useful one, I think.

I agree with Tom's approach.
The presence of a Technical (or even Editorial) Corrigendum shall not move 
the Reconfirmation Review due date as a Corrigendum does not imply a 
complete review of the document.

My cent.....


This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg/attachments/20170407/c4efc538/attachment.html>

More information about the CESG mailing list