[Sls-rfm] Revised recs on TTFRs

[Gian.Paolo.Calzolari at esa.int]

Enrico Vassallo/esoc/ESA wrote on 24/05/2017 08:51:21:

> Do I take it that you do not want to include the 10 editorially 
> revised recs on TTFRs but want do an agency review on them? 

Enrico, 
        as you know the CCSDS Editor has already stated that the current 
formulation does not fit for the Editorial Corrigendum but rather for 
Agency Review due (mainly [IMHO]) to the two new recommended requirements.

> 
> I could propose to the WG to remove the two additional considerings 
> and recommends and add a generic footnote about digital 
> implementation if this can avoid agency review of editorials !!! Of 
> course, this would have to be done also for the new rec just approved 
for AR.
> 
> Please advise, Enrico 
> 

I guess that in case the additions can be converted to a NON normative 
NOTE/paragraph the Editorial Corrigendum can be tried.
Tom, copied here, may suggest the best (and fastest) form for it (if WG 
agrees).

Regards

Gian Paolo
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/sls-rfm/attachments/20170524/38d4b0f0/attachment.html>