Re: Order of look-up for included interfaces

[Dan Kegel <dank@kegel.com>]

Andrew Pham wrote:
> Since we received different pointers as to which standard to take as the
> base reference, at different stages of our
> 'documenting-included-interfaces' endeavor ; we would like to post the
> exact order in which we look up stuffs.  First, to make sure that we are
> going down the right path; and second, so that anyone who has any other
> suggestion/feedback; please lets us know.
> 
> ORDER OF  PRECIDENCE and LOOK-UP for a BASE-REFERENCE :
>      ( for reference and compare)
> 
>      1) ISO-C99     (pay preview)
>      2)SUSv3   www.opengroup.org/austin/
>      3)SUSv2   http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/7908799/xshix.html
> ...

IMHO it's not right for the LSB to reference any pay-per-view standard
like ISO-C99.  ESPECIALLY as the first standard in the list!
Can we demote ISO-C99 to be further down in the list, or preferably,
delete it entirely from the list?

Thanks,
Dan