[r-t] Extensions

[Philip Saddleton]

Andrew Craddock <andrew at towerbase.net> wrote at 10:58:26 on Tue, 26 Oct 
2004
>Assuming that Richard is reasonably confident about his program (and I 
>guess he must be if he is prepared to put the source into the public 
>domain) then perhaps the MC's time might be productively spent in 
>preparing a suite of test cases which could validate Richard's (or 
>anyone elses) software.

We did discuss this, but came to the conclusion that it would be 
difficult for the MC to endorse a program as giving a definitive answer 
to any extension-related query. We can of course give answer any queries 
as to whether any particular generated extension is in fact valid.

>>>>If methods-related computer programs were to be published by the CC 
>>>>they would certainly fall within the Methods Committee remit.
>
>Does anyone understand what this statement means and its intended implications?

The terms of reference of the committee are:

"To consider and advise on all questions arising from the interpretation 
of the Council's Decisions relating to methods, calls, and peal 
ringing."

It would seem that methods-related programs must involve interpretation 
of the Decisions. That is not to say that publication of such would not 
involve other committees - in particular the Publications Committee 
might have something to say!

-- 
Regards
Philip
http://www.saddleton.freeuk.com/