[Cfp-interest] terms DPD and BID

[Mike Cowlishaw]

Jim & Marius,

While I agree with Mike that it should be better to use the IEC 60559
terminology, the reality is that DPD and BID were easier to identify the two
encodings and are spread widely in various publications. 

So unless Mike feels very strongly about avoiding DPD and BID I would leave them
in, properly qualified as you suggested. 

 

I don't have an opinion on the use of BID (although it has some slang meanings
in the UK, so I would avoid it).   I do feel very strongly about the use of DPD
to refer to the encoding as a whole, however.  It was a useful
abbreviation/jargon for committee use, but it does not do justice to the very
neat encoding of the exponent, etc., devised by Dan Zuras and others.   It's not
even the case that the whole coefficient is encoded using DPD.

 

I don't quite see the difficulty in using the  IEC 60559  terminology (perhaps
abbreviated).  Anyone implementing or using this level of detail will surely
have to be aware of that terminology anyway, and introducing a second way of
saying the same thing is best avoided if possible.

 

Mike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.oakapple.net/pipermail/cfp-interest/attachments/20130220/5b85d46b/attachment.html