Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

RE: [RPRWG] Missing changebars in tables




Some clause 6 tables are also missing changebars.

A simple way to figure out if a table has been modified is to check to see if the row descriptions have changebars. The row description changebars appear to be correct in all cases that I've checked.

jl

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Alexander [mailto:tom@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 10:11 AM
To: 'RPR Reflector'
Subject: [RPRWG] Missing changebars in Clause 10



Colleagues,

It has been brought to my attention that there were
some errors in generating changebars for Clause 10
tables and figures. This was probably caused by the
large number of changes in what is a fairly large
clause, resulting in FrameMaker missing a number of
items during the document compare.

The following tables and figures are not marked by
changebars, but ARE open for comment:

Figure 10.1 (modified)
Figure 10.7 (new)
Figure 10.8 (new)
Figure 10.14 (new)
Figure 10.15 (indexing made positive per ringlet)
Figure 10.16 (indexing made positive per ringlet)
Figure 10.17 (same as Figure 10.16)
Figure 10.22 (some changes due to new and removed ATTs)
Figure 10.26 (new)
Figure 10.28 (new)
Figure 10.29 (new)

Table 10.1 (editorial mods)
Table 10.3 (editorial mods)
Table 10.5 (WTR added)
Table 10.7 (a few changes)
Table 10.8 (many changes)
Table 10.9 (new, added as part of mods to 10.8)
Table 10.10 (some columns removed)
Table 10.11 (new)
Table 10.12 (transposed topo DB)
Table 10.13 (new)
Table 10.14 (new)
Table 10.15 (many changes)
Table 10.16 (some changes)
Table 10.17 (new)
Table 10.18 (some changes due to new and removed ATTs)
Table 10.19 (some changes due to new ATTs)
Table 10.20 (editorial mods)
Table 10.23 (new)

Note that Figure 10.25 did not change, but is marked
as changed in the draft (another FrameMaker bug).

My apologies for the errors in the changebars. I'm
reasonably confident that this is an unlikely to
recur as the next draft should not have anywhere near
the volume of changes that are present in this one.

Best regards,

- Tom Alexander
Chief Editor, P802.17