ETSI's Bug Tracker - ASN.1
View Issue Details
IDProjectCategoryView StatusDate SubmittedLast Update
0006315ASN.1Base Specpublic20-09-2012 16:4108-10-2012 17:12
ReporterSebastian Muellers 
Assigned ToAndras Kovacs 
PrioritynormalSeverityminorReproducibilityhave not tried
StatusclosedResolutionfixed 
PlatformOSOS Version
Product Versionv0.0.3 
Target VersionFixed in VersionV0.0.4 
Summary0006315: delet SHALL in asn.1 comments
DescriptionThe comments in the last two definitions: type specific RSU containers shall be added as extensions. I think the word SHALL can be removed, we do not want to impose anything of RSU in this standard, right? So no need to write a requirement here. We can use: type specific RSU containers might be added as extensions.
 
 -- further type specific containers may be added as extensions
Steps To Reproduce
Additional Information
TagsNo tags attached.
Relationships
Attached Files
Issue History
Date ModifiedUsernameFieldChange
20-09-2012 16:41Sebastian MuellersNew Issue
26-09-2012 17:12Andras KovacsNote Added: 0011147
26-09-2012 17:12Andras KovacsAssigned To => Andras Kovacs
26-09-2012 17:12Andras KovacsStatusnew => confirmed
08-10-2012 17:12Sebastian MuellersStatusconfirmed => closed
08-10-2012 17:12Sebastian MuellersResolutionopen => fixed
08-10-2012 17:12Sebastian MuellersFixed in Version => V0.0.4

Notes
(0011147)
Andras Kovacs   
26-09-2012 17:12   
Update done.
I agree that the '-- further type specific RSU containers might be added as extensions' comment phrasing is better. I kept the RSU word, to indicate that this expectation is the reason for the extensibility here