Re: Updated CG 7 Issues, draft 2

[Carl Sorensen]

On 6/5/10 10:32 AM, "James Bailey" <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> Maybe it's simply how I process information, but I think of the list
> at 7.1 as:
> Is #1 true? Yes, proceed. No? Go to #2
> Is #2 true? Yes, proceed. No? Go to #3S
> 
> Given that order of operations, I think it would make more sense for
> the ordering to be:
> 1, 3, 4, 5, 2, 6 (or something along those lines). Maybe this is just
> me trying to impose my understanding onto something that already
> makes sense as it is.

I like this idea.  I'd order it 1, 3, 4, 2, 5, 6. (but if we're asking the
user for more information, we should do both Tiny examples and version
number.

Also, for the answers on item 3, it would be best if we could point the user
to a particular section in the documentation, instead of just saying RTM.

Thanks,

Carl