Re: [core] Suresh Krishnan's No Objection on draft-ietf-core-senml-more-units-04: (with COMMENT)

[Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]>]

Hi Suresh,

it is somewhat unfortunate that we are only in the middle of the transition from closed to more openly available standards in the SI/ISQ space.  I wish I had a better answer about the IEC ones, ISO is one step ahead (at least with the recent versions).

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> I could not read the normative references to IEC-80000-6 and 13 as I do not
> have access . I trust the sponsoring AD to have gone through them and verified
> that the item number references are correct.

One of the few advantages of being associated with a university is that we have a library.
So I can pretend I got my copies from there...

> Also the following text in Section 3 seems very handwavy and not particularly
> helpful. Is this necessary?
> 
> "    It is not presently known to this author how
>      the upcoming revision of IEC 80000-6 will update this, but it has
>      became clear that there is strong interest in using this unit
>      specifically for the imaginary content of complex power, reactive
>      power [IEEE-1459]"

I would like to keep the reference to IEEE 1459 (which is almost reasonably accessible), but I agree that the lamenting about IEC is not needed.

Now in
https://github.com/core-wg/senml-more-units/commit/d3ceb1bde39307c74f81b1a50724c05f2db49c8d

Thank you!

Grüße, Carsten