  

<table class="width100" style="width:100%;" data-cellspacing="1">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 16%" />
<col style="width: 16%" />
<col style="width: 16%" />
<col style="width: 16%" />
<col style="width: 16%" />
<col style="width: 16%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="6" class="form-title"><div class="center">
ETSI's Bug Tracker - Part 01: TTCN-3 Core Language
</div></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="6" class="form-title">View Issue Details</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="6" class="print-spacer"><hr /></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print-category">
<td class="print" width="16%">ID</td>
<td class="print" width="16%">Project</td>
<td class="print" width="16%">Category</td>
<td class="print" width="16%">View Status</td>
<td class="print" width="16%">Date Submitted</td>
<td class="print" width="16%">Last Update</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">0004850</td>
<td class="print">Part 01: TTCN-3 Core Language</td>
<td class="print">Technical</td>
<td class="print">public</td>
<td class="print">13-02-2009 11:49</td>
<td class="print">26-02-2009 21:16</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="6" class="print-spacer"><hr /></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print-category">Reporter</td>
<td class="print">Thomas DeiÃŸ</td>
<td colspan="4" class="print"> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print-category">Assigned To</td>
<td class="print">Ina Schieferdecker</td>
<td colspan="4" class="print"> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print-category">Priority</td>
<td class="print">normal</td>
<td class="print-category">Severity</td>
<td class="print">minor</td>
<td class="print-category">Reproducibility</td>
<td class="print">have not tried</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print-category">Status</td>
<td class="print">closed</td>
<td class="print-category">Resolution</td>
<td class="print">fixed</td>
<td colspan="2" class="print"> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print-category">Platform</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td class="print-category">OS</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td class="print-category">OS Version</td>
<td class="print"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print-category">Product Version</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td colspan="4" class="print"> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print-category">Target Version</td>
<td class="print">v4.1.1 (published 2009-06)</td>
<td class="print-category">Fixed in Version</td>
<td class="print">v4.1.1 (published 2009-06)</td>
<td colspan="2" class="print"> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print-category">Clause Reference(s)</td>
<td colspan="4" class="print">part1, 6.2., 7.1.3</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print-category">Source (company - Author)</td>
<td colspan="4" class="print">Jacob Wieland, Testing Tech.</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="6" class="print-spacer"><hr /></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print-category">Summary</td>
<td colspan="5" class="print">0004850: type compatibility of union does
not coincide with union equality</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print-category">Description</td>
<td colspan="5" class="print">reported by Jacob Wieland on draft of
edition 4.1:<br />
<br />
I have a problem with the type compatibility of union types vs. the
equality of union values in the current draft of the core language
standard.<br />
<br />
As I understand it, a union type A is compatible to another union type B
(meaning expressions of A can be used as expressions of B, I presume),
if all its variants are also present in B - WITH THE SAME NAMES.<br />
<br />
In the section on relational operators, it is stated, that two union
values that can be equal need not have the same variant names, just
compatible types for 'counterparts' variants, (I guess, counterpart
means the variant at the same place in the union types, judging from the
examples, maybe this should be clarified further, as well).<br />
<br />
This means that two values of incompatible types can be equal in the
case of unions. In my understanding, though, it is normally only allowed
for compatible types to apply the comparison operators to. This seems to
be a kind of contradiction or at least inconsistency, which could lead
to a lot of confusion.<br />
<br />
Therefore, I would propose to either<br />
- change the union type compatibility in such a way that the existent
comparison operator semantics can be applied, (i.e. by ignoring the
field names and just regarding the order of the fields) OR<br />
- change the equality so that it is consistent with compatibility,
i.e.<br />
the type of one of the compared values must be compatible with the type
of the other one (which means the variants must be equally named and
typed, but not in the same order, as I understand it), thereby getting
equal union values if the variant with the same name is chosen in both
and the variant values of both are equal.<br />
<br />
Although I like the second variant more, because I like the concept of
union type compatibility that has been proposed, the change COULD cause
backward incompatibilities in those cases where the current feature of
name-independence and order-dependence for equality of union values was
used. This is a question that should be asked if anyone knows of a test
suite where this feature was used (which I actually doubt, cause it is a
very strange definition of union equality in the first place).<br />
<br />
Therefore, I would vote for option 2, i.e. keeping the proposed type
compatibility and changing the equality semantics.<br />
</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print-category">Steps To Reproduce</td>
<td colspan="5" class="print"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print-category">Additional Information</td>
<td colspan="5" class="print"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print-category">Tags</td>
<td colspan="5" class="print">No tags attached.</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print-category">Relationships</td>
<td colspan="5" class="print"><table data-border="0" width="100%"
data-cellpadding="0" data-cellspacing="1">
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print"><span class="nowrap">related to</span> </td>
<td class="print">0004508</td>
<td class="print">closed </td>
<td class="print"><span class="nowrap"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=81">Ina
Schieferdecker</a></span> </td>
<td class="print">type compatibility of relational operators </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print-category">Attached Files</td>
<td colspan="5" class="print"><img
src="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/images/fileicons/doc.gif"
alt="doc" /> Resolution CR_4850.doc (158,208) <span
class="italic">16-02-2009 11:55</span><br />
http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=2001&amp;type=bug<br />
<img src="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/images/fileicons/doc.gif"
alt="doc" /> Resolution CR_4850_r1.doc (153,600) <span
class="italic">16-02-2009 16:31</span><br />
http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=2002&amp;type=bug<br />
<img src="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/images/fileicons/doc.gif"
alt="doc" /> Resolution CR_4850_r2.doc (155,136) <span
class="italic">18-02-2009 08:29</span><br />
http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=2004&amp;type=bug<br />
<img src="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/images/fileicons/doc.gif"
alt="doc" /> Resolution CR_4850_r3.doc (159,744) <span
class="italic">20-02-2009 12:41</span><br />
http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=2009&amp;type=bug<br />
<img src="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/images/fileicons/doc.gif"
alt="doc" /> Resolution_CR_4850_r4.doc (176,640) <span
class="italic">20-02-2009 14:37</span><br />
http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=2010&amp;type=bug<br />
<img src="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/images/fileicons/doc.gif"
alt="doc" /> Resolution_CR_4850_r5.doc (178,688) <span
class="italic">20-02-2009 16:23</span><br />
http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=2011&amp;type=bug<br />
<img src="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/images/fileicons/doc.gif"
alt="doc" /> Resolution_CR_4850_r6.doc (259,072) <span
class="italic">26-02-2009 09:22</span><br />
http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=2015&amp;type=bug<br />
<img src="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/images/fileicons/doc.gif"
alt="doc" /> Resolution_CR_4850_r7.doc (265,728) <span
class="italic">26-02-2009 14:16</span><br />
http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=2016&amp;type=bug<br />
<img src="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/images/fileicons/doc.gif"
alt="doc" /> Resolution_CR_4850_r8.doc (271,360) <span
class="italic">26-02-2009 15:58</span><br />
http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/file_download.php?file_id=2017&amp;type=bug</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="6" class="print-spacer"><hr /></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="form-title">Issue History</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print-category">
<td class="row-category-history">Date Modified</td>
<td class="row-category-history">Username</td>
<td class="row-category-history">Field</td>
<td class="row-category-history">Change</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">13-02-2009 11:49</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=112">Thomas
DeiÃŸ</a></td>
<td class="print">New Issue</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">13-02-2009 11:49</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=112">Thomas
DeiÃŸ</a></td>
<td class="print">Status</td>
<td class="print">new =&gt; assigned</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">13-02-2009 11:49</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=112">Thomas
DeiÃŸ</a></td>
<td class="print">Assigned To</td>
<td class="print">=&gt; Ina Schieferdecker</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">13-02-2009 11:49</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=112">Thomas
DeiÃŸ</a></td>
<td class="print">Clause Reference(s)</td>
<td class="print">=&gt; part1, 6.2., 7.1.3</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">13-02-2009 11:49</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=112">Thomas
DeiÃŸ</a></td>
<td class="print">Source (company - Author)</td>
<td class="print">=&gt; Jacob Wieland, Testing Tech.</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">13-02-2009 11:50</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=112">Thomas
DeiÃŸ</a></td>
<td class="print">Note Added: 0008098</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">13-02-2009 12:49</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=112">Thomas
DeiÃŸ</a></td>
<td class="print">Target Version</td>
<td class="print">=&gt; Edition 4.1.1 (not yet published)</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 05:46</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=81">Ina
Schieferdecker</a></td>
<td class="print">Note Added: 0008102</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 05:47</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=81">Ina
Schieferdecker</a></td>
<td class="print">Resolution</td>
<td class="print">open =&gt; fixed</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 05:47</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=81">Ina
Schieferdecker</a></td>
<td class="print">Status</td>
<td class="print">assigned =&gt; resolved</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 05:47</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=81">Ina
Schieferdecker</a></td>
<td class="print">Fixed in Version</td>
<td class="print">=&gt; Edition 4.1.1 (not yet published)</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 05:49</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=81">Ina
Schieferdecker</a></td>
<td class="print">Relationship added</td>
<td class="print">related to 0004508</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 05:50</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=81">Ina
Schieferdecker</a></td>
<td class="print">Status</td>
<td class="print">resolved =&gt; closed</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 09:47</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a></td>
<td class="print">Assigned To</td>
<td class="print">Ina Schieferdecker =&gt; Thomas DeiÃŸ</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 09:47</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a></td>
<td class="print">Status</td>
<td class="print">closed =&gt; feedback</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 09:47</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a></td>
<td class="print">Resolution</td>
<td class="print">fixed =&gt; reopened</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 09:47</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a></td>
<td class="print">Note Added: 0008106</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 10:25</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=112">Thomas
DeiÃŸ</a></td>
<td class="print">Note Added: 0008108</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 10:26</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=112">Thomas
DeiÃŸ</a></td>
<td class="print">Assigned To</td>
<td class="print">Thomas DeiÃŸ =&gt; Gyorgy Rethy</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 10:26</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=112">Thomas
DeiÃŸ</a></td>
<td class="print">Status</td>
<td class="print">feedback =&gt; assigned</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 10:26</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=112">Thomas
DeiÃŸ</a></td>
<td class="print">Resolution</td>
<td class="print">reopened =&gt; open</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 10:29</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=81">Ina
Schieferdecker</a></td>
<td class="print">Note Added: 0008109</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 10:29</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=81">Ina
Schieferdecker</a></td>
<td class="print">Note Edited: 0008109</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 11:54</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a></td>
<td class="print">Note Added: 0008111</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 11:55</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a></td>
<td class="print">File Added: Resolution CR_4850.doc</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 16:31</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=81">Ina
Schieferdecker</a></td>
<td class="print">File Added: Resolution CR_4850_r1.doc</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">18-02-2009 08:29</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=112">Thomas
DeiÃŸ</a></td>
<td class="print">File Added: Resolution CR_4850_r2.doc</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">20-02-2009 12:41</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=81">Ina
Schieferdecker</a></td>
<td class="print">File Added: Resolution CR_4850_r3.doc</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">20-02-2009 14:37</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a></td>
<td class="print">File Added: Resolution_CR_4850_r4.doc</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">20-02-2009 14:46</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a></td>
<td class="print">Note Added: 0008167</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">20-02-2009 16:23</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a></td>
<td class="print">File Added: Resolution_CR_4850_r5.doc</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">20-02-2009 16:28</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a></td>
<td class="print">Note Added: 0008171</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">24-02-2009 07:44</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a></td>
<td class="print">Assigned To</td>
<td class="print">Gyorgy Rethy =&gt; Ina Schieferdecker</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">26-02-2009 09:22</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a></td>
<td class="print">File Added: Resolution_CR_4850_r6.doc</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">26-02-2009 09:29</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a></td>
<td class="print">Note Added: 0008201</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">26-02-2009 14:16</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a></td>
<td class="print">File Added: Resolution_CR_4850_r7.doc</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">26-02-2009 14:18</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a></td>
<td class="print">Note Added: 0008203</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">26-02-2009 15:58</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a></td>
<td class="print">File Added: Resolution_CR_4850_r8.doc</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">26-02-2009 15:59</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a></td>
<td class="print">Note Added: 0008204</td>
<td class="print"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">26-02-2009 21:15</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=81">Ina
Schieferdecker</a></td>
<td class="print">Status</td>
<td class="print">assigned =&gt; resolved</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd print">
<td class="print">26-02-2009 21:15</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=81">Ina
Schieferdecker</a></td>
<td class="print">Resolution</td>
<td class="print">open =&gt; fixed</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even print">
<td class="print">26-02-2009 21:16</td>
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=81">Ina
Schieferdecker</a></td>
<td class="print">Status</td>
<td class="print">resolved =&gt; closed</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

  

<table class="width100" data-cellspacing="1">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 50%" />
<col style="width: 50%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="2" class="form-title">Notes</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2" class="print-spacer"><hr /></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="20%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">(0008098)</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=112">Thomas
DeiÃŸ</a>   </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">13-02-2009 11:50   </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="85%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 100%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">Discussion so far (email thread):<br />
Hello Gyorgy,<br />
<br />
Regarding this case 3: when checking the definition of equality again, I
recognized that we avoided a general statement to require that equality
can be applied to values of compatible types only. We defined equality
type by type. Therefore we could also allow to compare arbitrary union
values. Result in this specific case 3 would be false. Gyorgy, your
proposal is then fine for me.<br />
<br />
I have added a specific proposal below:<br />
<br />
Current text in clause 7.1.3<br />
Two values of union types are equal if, and only if, the effective value
structures of the union types are compatible, the selected fields in
both values are the counterparts to each other, the types of the chosen
fields are compatible and the actual values of the chosen fields are
equal<br />
<br />
New proposal:<br />
Two values of union types are equal if, and only if, the both values are
compatible with the type of the other value, the same alternative has
been selected in both values, and the actual values of the chosen fields
are equal.<br />
<br />
Best regards<br />
<br />
Thomas<br />
<br />
&gt;-----Original Message-----<br />
&gt;From: ext GyÃ¶rgy RÃ©thy [<a
href="mailto:mailto:gyorgy.rethy@ericsson.com">mailto:gyorgy.rethy@ericsson.com</a>]<br />
&gt;Sent: Thursday, 12. February 2009 11:39<br />
&gt;To: Deiss, Thomas (NSN - DE/Duesseldorf); Schieferdecker, Ina; ext
Jens<br />
&gt;Grabowski<br />
&gt;Cc: Jacob Wieland<br />
&gt;Subject: RE: [MTS-GEN] Approval of TTCN-3 drafts for Edition
4.1.1<br />
&gt;<br />
&gt;Hi Thomas,<br />
&gt;<br />
&gt;In case 3) I would also always return false. Shortly, we are
comparing<br />
&gt;two values, u1 and u2. If the name of the selected alternative in
both<br />
&gt;values are the same AND the types of the selected alternatives are
the<br />
&gt;same (enumerated), compatible (structured types) or has the same
root<br />
&gt;type (basic types), comparision returns true, otherwise false.<br />
&gt;<br />
&gt;I think it would an unnecessary complication to separate the case
type<br />
&gt;union U1( integer a }; type union U2{integer a, integer b } from
the<br />
&gt;case type union U1( integer a }; type union U3{integer c, integer b
}<br />
&gt;<br />
&gt;We also do allow comparing values of these integer subtypes, though
it<br />
&gt;is clear that they do not have a common subset, thus comparision
can<br />
&gt;never be true:<br />
&gt;type integer I1 (0..2); type integer I2 (3..5);<br />
&gt;<br />
&gt;BTW. if the assignment in the example below could be reached, it
would<br />
&gt;cause test case error... but it can never be reached:<br />
&gt;var I1 i1; var I2 i2;<br />
&gt;... //some values are allocated to i1 and i2 if (i1 == i2) {i1 :=
i2}<br />
&gt;<br />
&gt;BR, Gyorgy<br />
&gt;<br />
&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; -----Original Message-----<br />
&gt;&gt; From: Deiss, Thomas (NSN - DE/Duesseldorf)<br />
&gt;&gt; [<a
href="mailto:mailto:thomas.deiss@nsn.com">mailto:thomas.deiss@nsn.com</a>]<br />
&gt;&gt; Sent: 2009-februÃ¡r-12 11:07<br />
&gt;&gt; To: GyÃ¶rgy RÃ©thy; Schieferdecker, Ina; ext Jens
Grabowski<br />
&gt;&gt; Cc: Jacob Wieland<br />
&gt;&gt; Subject: RE: [MTS-GEN] Approval of TTCN-3 drafts for Edition
4.1.1<br />
&gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; Hello Gyorgy,<br />
&gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; So, if there are two union types U1 and U2, and two values u1
and u2<br />
&gt;&gt; of type U1 and U2 respectively, then there are three
cases:<br />
&gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; 1) If u1 is compatible with U2 and u2 is compatible with U1,
then<br />
&gt;&gt; comparison is possible and if the same alternative is selected
and<br />
&gt;&gt; holds the same value the result will be true, otherwise
false.<br />
&gt;&gt; 2) If either u1 is compatible with U2 or u2 is compatible with
U1,<br />
&gt;&gt; the comparison is allowed, but would always result in
false.<br />
&gt;&gt; 3) If neither u1 is compatible with U2 nor u2 is compatible
with U2,<br />
&gt;&gt; then this would be an error.<br />
&gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; Did I get your proposal correctly?<br />
&gt;&gt; If so, then this would be fine from my side.<br />
&gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; Best regards<br />
&gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; Thomas<br />
&gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;-----Original Message-----<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;From: ext GyÃ¶rgy RÃ©thy [<a
href="mailto:mailto:gyorgy.rethy@ericsson.com">mailto:gyorgy.rethy@ericsson.com</a>]<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;Sent: Wednesday, 11. February 2009 09:50<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;To: Deiss, Thomas (NSN - DE/Duesseldorf);
Schieferdecker,<br />
&gt;&gt; Ina; ext Jens<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;Grabowski<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;Cc: Jacob Wieland<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;Subject: RE: [MTS-GEN] Approval of TTCN-3 drafts for
Edition 4.1.1<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;Importance: High<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;Hi Thomas,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;Your example will never fail with my union
compatibility<br />
&gt;&gt; proposal! Once<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;the equality is true, in both values the same
alternatives<br />
&gt;&gt; are chosen<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;and the asignment will be successful.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;What I propose is, in fact, that the comparision "u1 ==
u2"<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;should not cause test case error; it should return
false<br />
&gt;&gt; instead (thus<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;the assignment does not get control);<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;As I wrote, I can see the situation here to be similar to
e.g.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;subtyped integers. See the examples:<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;type integer MyInt1 (0..1);<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;type integer MyInt2 (1..3);<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;type integer MyInt3 (2..3);<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;...<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;var MyInt1 int1; var MyInt2 int2; var MyInt3 int3;
...<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;int1 := int2; // may fail if int2 &lt;&gt; 1<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;int1 := int3; // will fail for sure<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;int3 := int1; // will fail for sure<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;if(int1 == int2) {int1 := int2; int2 := int1} //will never
fail<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;if(int1 == int3) {int1 := int3; int3 := int1} //will
never<br />
&gt;&gt; fail, just<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;the body of the if stmt. never executed<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;I fact, looking at these examples, compatibility of
(the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;complete) union types should never be controlled at<br />
&gt;&gt; comparision, just<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;the compatibility of the selected alternatives (name
and<br />
&gt;field_type)<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;and always return false or true.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;BR, Gyorgy<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; -----Original Message-----<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; From: Deiss, Thomas (NSN - DE/Duesseldorf)<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; [<a
href="mailto:mailto:thomas.deiss@nsn.com">mailto:thomas.deiss@nsn.com</a>]<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Sent: 2009-februÃ¡r-11 8:31<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; To: GyÃ¶rgy RÃ©thy; Schieferdecker, Ina; ext Jens
Grabowski<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Cc: Jacob Wieland<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Subject: RE: [MTS-GEN] Approval of TTCN-3 drafts for
Edition 4.1.1<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Hello Gyorgy,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; In my opinion, type compatibility and equality should
be<br />
&gt;&gt; defined such<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; that for two union variables u1, u2 of two
different<br />
&gt;types U1, U2,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; the following code never fails in the
assignment.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; if (u1 == u2) {<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; u1 := u2;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; ...<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Additionally, whereever u1 can be used in an operation
or<br />
&gt;&gt; expression<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; it is possible to use u2. This includes the usage of
ischosen(),<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; which could be used to check whether a different<br />
&gt;&gt; alternative than the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; currently chosen one has been chosen.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; This implies that the definition of equality is<br />
&gt;&gt; symmetrical, I think<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; that just requiring that one union type is compatible
with<br />
&gt;&gt; the other<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; is not sufficient.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Note that this property does not hold for record
values<br />
&gt;&gt; (fieldnames<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; are not considered in the check for equality), hence
the strict<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; definition above would be different to the definition
of<br />
&gt;&gt; equality of<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; other types.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Best regards<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Thomas<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;-----Original Message-----<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;From: ext GyÃ¶rgy RÃ©thy [<a
href="mailto:mailto:gyorgy.rethy@ericsson.com">mailto:gyorgy.rethy@ericsson.com</a>]<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;Sent: Tuesday, 10. February 2009 16:16<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;To: Deiss, Thomas (NSN - DE/Duesseldorf);
Schieferdecker,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Ina; ext Jens<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;Grabowski<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;Cc: Jacob Wieland<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;Subject: RE: [MTS-GEN] Approval of TTCN-3 drafts
for<br />
&gt;Edition 4.1.1<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;Importance: High<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;Dear all,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;we also do support Jacob's proposal, i.e. option
two,<br />
&gt;namely that<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;compatibility of union values shall be based on
equal field<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; name and a<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;compatible value.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;But this second condition raises another
question:<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;compatibility of union types, where the
alternatives of<br />
&gt;&gt; one of the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;types (call it A) is a subset of the alternatives
in the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; another type<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;(call it B). In this case, a value of A could
always be<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; assigned to an<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;instance of B, i.e. A is compatible with B. This
is fine in<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; the case of<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;assignment( &amp; alike) operations, but may cause
problems in<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; the case of<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;comparision (being defined as a symmetrical
operation).<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;What to do if a value of A (which is compatible
with B) is<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; compared to<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;an instance of B in which the selected alternative
is<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;outside of the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;common subset? Error or false? Error could be the
principal<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; answer but<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;false would be the practical one.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;I feel this case to be similar to the case of
comparing two<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;subtyped<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;integers, where the value sets of their types do
not have<br />
&gt;&gt; a common<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;subset. Thus, I would say, if at least one of the
union<br />
&gt;values is<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;compatible to the type of the other value,
comparision<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;should return<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;false in the above case.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;If you think this is a realistic use case, as one
may want<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; to restrict<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;the alternatives used in one message and allow the
broader<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; selection in<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;another message. As we do not have extensibility
for<br />
&gt;&gt; types, the way<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;today is to define two - compatible - types
(strictly for<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; matching it<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;could be enough to define a base value set
template, but<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; this approach<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;would fail at the first case when the message or
the union<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; field has to<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;be passed as parameter).<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;BR, Gyorgy<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; -----Original Message-----<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; From: Deiss, Thomas (NSN -
DE/Duesseldorf)<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; [<a
href="mailto:mailto:thomas.deiss@nsn.com">mailto:thomas.deiss@nsn.com</a>]<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Sent: 2009-februÃ¡r-10 7:50<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; To: Schieferdecker, Ina; ext Jens Grabowski;
GyÃ¶rgy RÃ©thy<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Subject: FW: [MTS-GEN] Approval of TTCN-3
drafts for<br />
&gt;&gt; Edition 4.1.1<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Good morning together,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Jacob raised an issue on compatibility of
union types and<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; equality of<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; union values. I agree with Jacob's proposal
to define<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;equality for<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; two union values if the same alternative
(indicated by<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;the name of<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; the alternative) and the same value is
chosen. As usual,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;values of<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; compatible union types can be compared
against each other,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; they have<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; the same alternatives and that the
alternatives are defined<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; identically.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; But this implies that there is a backwards
incompatible<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; change, see<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; the example on equality of union values in
clause<br />
&gt;&gt; 7.1.3. With the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; definitions above, some of the equal values
would no<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; longer be equal.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; What do you think, should we go for this
change. If yes,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; then I could<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; ask the tool vendors whether they are aware
of any test<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; suite where<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; this would be a problem, and if ok propose
the specific<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; text. If no,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; then we probably should weaken the definition
of type<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; compatibility<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; of union values such that it corresponds to
this example:<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Two union<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; types are compatible if they have the same
number of<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;alternatives,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; and in the order of the definition, the types
of the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; alternatives are<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; compatible. Names of alternatives would not
be relevant at all.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; I would also prefer Jacobs proposal.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Best regards<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Thomas<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; PS: Sorry for disturbing in case you received
similar<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; email already<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; yesterday, but I had some problems with
sending to MTS-GEN<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; yesterday.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;-----Original Message-----<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;From: Deiss, Thomas (NSN -
DE/Duesseldorf)<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;Sent: Monday, 09. February 2009
10:11<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;To: 'Jacob Wieland';
MTS-GEN@LIST.ETSI.ORG<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;Subject: RE: [MTS-GEN] Approval of TTCN-3
drafts for<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;Edition 4.1.1<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;Hello Jacob,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;Thanks for pointing this out.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;Yes, there is actually an inconsistency
between 6.3.2.4 Type<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;compatibility of union types and 7.1.3.
Relational Operators.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;I suggest also to use proposal 2). You
are right, this<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;would be a<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;backward incompatible change. And you are
also that the term<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;'counterpart' in 7.1.3 leaves room for
interpretation<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; (does it mean<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;same name or same position in the
definition).<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;The example<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt; conUniD1 == conUniE1;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt; // returns true<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;suggests that it is 'same position in the
definition',<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; independent of<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;the name of the alternative. Again, this
would contradict the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;definition of compatibility in clause
6.3.2.4.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;Taking compatibility as in clause
6.3.2.4, 'counterpart'<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;should really mean that the same
alternative (indicated<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; by the same<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;name) is taken in both values.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;Best regards<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;Thomas<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;-----Original Message-----<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;From: MTS_Gen
[mailto:MTS-GEN@LIST.ETSI.ORG] On Behalf Of<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;ext Jacob<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;Wieland<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;Sent: Thursday, 05. February 2009
16:02<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;To: MTS-GEN@LIST.ETSI.ORG<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;Subject: Re: [MTS-GEN] Approval of
TTCN-3 drafts for<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Edition 4.1.1<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;Hello folks,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;I have a problem with the type
compatibility of union<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;types vs. the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;equality of union values in the
current draft of the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; core language<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;standard.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;As I understand it, a union type A is
compatible to another<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; union type<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;B (meaning expressions of A can be
used as<br />
&gt;expressions of B, I<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;presume),<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;if all its variants are also present
in B - WITH THE<br />
&gt;&gt; SAME NAMES.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;In the section on relational
operators, it is stated, that<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; two union<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;values that can be equal need not
have the same variant<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;names, just<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;compatible types for 'counterparts'
variants, (I guess,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;counterpart<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;means the variant at the same place
in the union types,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; judging from<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;the examples, maybe this should be
clarified further,<br />
&gt;&gt; as well).<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;This means that two values of
incompatible types can be<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; equal in the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;case of unions. In my understanding,
though, it is<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;normally only<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;allowed for compatible types to apply
the comparison<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; operators to.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;This seems to<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;be a kind of contradiction or at
least inconsistency, which<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;could lead<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;to a lot of confusion.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;Therefore, I would propose to
either<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;- change the union type compatibility
in such a way that<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; the existent<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;comparison operator semantics can be
applied, (i.e. by<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;ignoring the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;field names and just regarding the
order of the fields) OR<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;- change the equality so that it is
consistent with<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; compatibility,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;i.e.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;the type of one of the compared
values must be<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; compatible with the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;type of the other one (which means
the variants must be<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; equally named<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;and typed, but not in the same order,
as I understand it),<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;thereby getting<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;equal union values if the variant
with the same name is<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;chosen in both<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;and the variant values of both are
equal.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;Although I like the second variant
more, because I like the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;concept of<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;union type compatibility that has
been proposed, the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; change COULD<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;cause backward incompatibilities in
those cases where<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;the current<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;feature of<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;name-independence and
order-dependence for equality of<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;union values<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;was used. This is a question that
should be asked if anyone<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; knows of a<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;test suite where this feature was
used (which I actually<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; doubt, cause<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;it is a very strange definition of
union equality in the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; first place).<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;Therefore, I would vote for option 2,
i.e. keeping the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; proposed type<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;compatibility and changing the
equality semantics.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;Best regards,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;Jacob Wieland<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;--<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;---------------------------------------------------------------<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;----------<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;Jacob Wieland<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;Software Engineer<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;Testing Technologies IST GmbH
MichaelkirchstraÃŸe 17/18<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;10179 Berlin, Germany<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;Phone +49 30 726 19 19 34 Email<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; <a
href="mailto:wieland@testingtech.com">wieland@testingtech.com</a><br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;Fax +49 30 726 19 19 20
Internet<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; www.testingtech.com<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;---------------------------------------------------------------<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;----------<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;UPCOMING EVENTS<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;February 5, Free TTCN-3 Webinar<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;TTCN-3 for Test Automation<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;www.testingtech.com/services/ttcn3_webinar.php<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;February 16-19, 2009, Mobile World
Congress Barcelona,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Spain, Hall<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;2.1, Booth #B77
www.mobileworldcongress.com/<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;February 18, 2009, sepp.med
Expertensymposium Deutschland,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;Herzogenaurach www.seppmed.de/<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;---------------------------------------------------------------<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;----------<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;GeschÃ¤ftsfÃ¼hrung: Theofanis
Vassiliou-Gioles,<br />
&gt;Stephan Pietsch<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;Handelsregister HRB 77805,
Amtsgericht Charlottenburg Ust<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; ID Nr.: DE<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;813 143 070<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;This e-mail may contain confidential
and privileged<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; material for the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;sole use of the intended recipient.
Any review, use,<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; distribution or<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;disclosure by others is strictly
prohibited. If you<br />
&gt;&gt; are not the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;intended recipient (or authorized to
receive for the<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;recipient),<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;please contact the sender by reply
e-mail and delete all<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; copies of<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;this message.<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;-------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;Mail archive for MTS-GEN can be
browsed at the<br />
&gt;&gt; following url :<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; <a
href="http://list.etsi.org/MTS-GEN.html">http://list.etsi.org/MTS-GEN.html</a>
[<a href="http://list.etsi.org/MTS-GEN.html"
target="_blank">^</a>]<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;-------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;&gt; &gt;<br />
&gt;&gt;<br />
&gt;</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2" class="print-spacer"><hr /></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="20%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">(0008102)</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=81">Ina
Schieferdecker</a>   </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 05:46   </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="85%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">7.1.3 corrected as proposed: "Two values of union
types are equal if, and only if, both values are compatible with the
type of the other value, the same alternative has been selected in both
values, and the actual values of the chosen fields are equal."</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2" class="print-spacer"><hr /></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="20%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">(0008106)</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a>   </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 09:47   </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="85%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">Unfortunately the proposed text would require that the
types of the two values are completely identical and does not specify
what should happen if two values of incompatible types (or a value
compatible with the type of the other value) is compared (false or
error)?</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2" class="print-spacer"><hr /></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="20%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">(0008108)</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=112">Thomas
DeiÃŸ</a>   </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 10:25   </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="85%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 100%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">Seems that the 'if and only if' is not sufficient...
Requested cased expressed explicitly.<br />
<br />
Two values of union types are equal if, and only if, both values are
compatible with the type of the other value, the same alternative has
been selected in both values, and the actual values of the chosen fields
are equal. In case that the values are not compatible, a different
alternative was chosen, or the actual values are different, the result
shall be false.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2" class="print-spacer"><hr /></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="20%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">(0008109)</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=81">Ina
Schieferdecker</a>   </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 10:29   </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="85%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 100%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">An "if and only if" is content-wise expressive enough
- I do not see a need to enumerate the other cases explicitly.<br />
<br />
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2" class="print-spacer"><hr /></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="20%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">(0008111)</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a>   </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">16-02-2009 11:54   </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="85%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">Pls. see my proposal for the text in the attached
file.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2" class="print-spacer"><hr /></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="20%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">(0008167)</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a>   </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">20-02-2009 14:46   </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="85%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 100%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">Pls. find my additions in Resolution_CR_4850_r4.doc.
Regarding the union stuff I have restored the sentence saying that
comparing two union values shall not cause an error. It is important, as
you can remember that the whole discussion on equality started with a
mail on the TTCN-3 list (I think from Spain) asking, in which case
comparision shall lead to error and in which case to false. So, it is
important to be clear and explicit in this respect. Plus some
editorials.<br />
<br />
I also added a new subclause on anytype compatibility. It differs
slightly from union compatibility as in anytype type names are used as
field identifiers. But while the name of a built-in TTCN-3 type denotes
the same type in each module, two types with the same name defined in
different modules denoting different types, thus shall not be "the same
field name".</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2" class="print-spacer"><hr /></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="20%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">(0008171)</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a>   </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">20-02-2009 16:28   </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="85%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 100%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">One more change in version ~r5.doc. The "root" type
has nothing to do with type compatibility, therefore referencing to
effective structures and clause 6.3 in the definition of root type is
not correct; this is relevant only when defining which types are
compatible within the whole set of a root type (e.g. which records are
compatible and one are not).<br />
E.g.<br />
type integer I1 (0..2);<br />
type integer I2 (3..4);<br />
are not compatible (not a single instance of I1 is compatible with I2
and vice versa), still they have the same root type.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2" class="print-spacer"><hr /></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="20%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">(0008201)</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a>   </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">26-02-2009 09:29   </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="85%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 100%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">Pls. note:<br />
- I tried to apply the text proposed by Jens but did not copied it
one-to-one.<br />
- I also copied and reviewede all uses of "root" in Part-1. I
highlighted them with yellow for your convenience only, no other meaning
behind.<br />
- I have also reviewed the definition of union type to remove
inconsistency in the termilogy used in relation to unions and thus
prevent misinterpretations.<br />
<br />
Good reading!</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2" class="print-spacer"><hr /></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="20%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">(0008203)</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a>   </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">26-02-2009 14:18   </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="85%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 100%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">~r7:<br />
- editorials are corrected, thank for the comments<br />
- three notes added, all of them are related to address; highlighted
with blue background to make it easier to find them.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2" class="print-spacer"><hr /></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="20%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">(0008204)</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td class="print"><a
href="http://oldforge.etsi.org/mantis/view_user_page.php?id=127">Gyorgy
Rethy</a>   </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">26-02-2009 15:59   </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
<td class="nopad" data-valign="top" width="85%"><table class="hide"
data-cellspacing="1">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 100%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td class="print">in ~r8:<br />
- Thomas's editorial comment is implemented<br />
- word comments are deleted</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
