[CF-metadata] CF errata

From: Brian Eaton <eaton>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 11:26:42 -0600

Hi Jonathan,

After reading the trac ticket you opened on this issue I realized that the
technical term in question is "auxiliary", not "associated". It's been a
while since I looked at the convention. So the current wording is not
incorrect as I initially thought. But I think the original wording
(without associated) is clearer.

Brian


On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 08:35:13AM +0100, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
> Dear John
>
> I agree too, and I have put it in a "defect" trac ticket. If no-one objects
> within three weeks, Velimir will correct it.
>
> Cheers
>
> Jonathan
Received on Mon Oct 13 2008 - 11:26:42 BST