Replace "this International Standard" with "this document" when #1748
Conversation
referring to the document as a body of text. Cases where that phrasing is used to compare this standard to other revisions of the C++ standard retain this phrasing for clarity. Fixes ISO 20 (C++17 DIS)
| @@ -3897,7 +3897,7 @@ | |||
| floating-point types}. | |||
| \indextext{floating-point type!implementation-defined}% | |||
| \begin{note} | |||
| This International Standard imposes no requirements on the accuracy of | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I feel this change is a regression, but I can't quite say why. I think it's clear to me that a Standard can make impositions, but it sounds odd that a document would do so.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this is an improvement, for what it's worth. It clarifies that this document imposes no requirements, but other documents (for instance, other standards that your implementation might follow, such as ISO/IEC 60559, or vendor-specific compiler flags, may impose further requirements). The fact that this document is an International Standard is irrelevant here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I suppose that makes sense. It's probably just my lack of familiarity with the phrase, and I'll get used to it. I can see the consistency argument.
| ``no diagnostic is required'' or which are described as resulting in | ||
| ``undefined behavior''. | ||
|
|
||
| \pnum | ||
| \indextext{conformance requirements!method of description}% | ||
| Although this International Standard states only requirements on \Cpp | ||
| Although this document states only requirements on \Cpp |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I must admit I find changing some of these places to "this document" a regression. (And I disagree with the ISO directives essentially banning "this International Standard".) I full agree with "this document" when it comes to internal organizations, chapters, etc. Once we get into defining requirements (such as above, or in "imposes no requirements on floating-point"), I feel "this Int. Std." makes it clearer that while it's the job of the Standard to define requirements, it opted not to for this particular case. (And other standards may fill the gap.) Just talking about "this document" seems too low-profile to me.
But ISO says we should use "this document", so my opinion is probably irrelevant.
referring to the document as a body of text.
Cases where that phrasing is used to compare this standard to other
revisions of the C++ standard retain this phrasing for clarity.
Fixes ISO 20 (C++17 DIS)