Defect in XBD 10.2

[yyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

        Defect report from : Andrew Josey , The Open Group

(Please direct followup comments direct to yyyyyyyyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)

@ page 185 line 6540 section 10.2 comment {comment}

Problem:

Edition of Specification (Year): 2003

Defect code :  3. Clarification required

Section 10.2 requires
that the PCD shall document which terminal types the system supports and
which of the features and utilities in the Shell and Utilities volume
of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001 that are not supported by each terminal.

Contrast this to the lp utility where it explicitly uses
unspecified rather than implementation-defined and states:


                                                                               
"The term unspecified is used in this section in lieu of implementation-defined 
as most known implementations would not be able to make definitive statements 
in their conformance documents; the existence and usage of printers is very 
dependent on how the system  administrator configures each individual system."

The variety of terminal support would appear to be a similar case to printers.

Action:

Consider making the requirement unspecified rather than
implementation-defined, or a more general requirement
on classes of terminals?