Reference to Annex Clauses should be like "Clause A.2" and "A.2.3"

[ronaldtse]

From @intelligent2013

According to ISO DIR 2, Annex clauses are "A.1", "B.1"... and they are considered "clause numbers":

Therefore they should be rendered as:

• "Clause A.1"
• "Clause B.2"
• "A.1.2"
• "B.2.3.4"

reference from Annex A sub-clause to another sub-clause

• rendered PDF:
• production PDF:

Originally posted by @Intelligent2013 in https://github.com/metanorma/metanorma-iso/issues/1134#issuecomment-2010589203

[opoudjis]

This change expressly does not apply to BSI.

[ronaldtse]

This change expressly does not apply to BSI.

How come?

[opoudjis]

This change expressly does not apply to BSI.

How come?

Because they said so:

https://www.bsigroup.com/globalassets/documents/standards/guide-to-standards/rules-for-structure-and-drafting-of-uk-standards-2022.pdf

[opoudjis]

But no clear reason to have the list reference container be any different to a clause crossreference: Clause 7 a), not 7 a).

[ronaldtse]

@opoudjis but look at Figure 1, it is the exact same figure as ISO’s, where A.1 is a “Clause number”. Accompanied by the paragraph you quote which are just examples, I’d say it’s a bug in their guide. The proper way is ISO here. I’ll report this bug.

[opoudjis]

Until I hear from them that it's in error, I'm going with the example. The figure doesn't take priority over it.

[ronaldtse]

@opoudjis just change it now. I’ll email them. Let’s not waste our time in waiting.

[opoudjis]

I am not introducing errors, so the answer is no. The documents do not reflect the figure chart, they reflect the examples, and BSI are clearly not authoring "Clause A.1."

[ronaldtse]

Well then please keep track of Peter's reply. Please document the current behavior on the website since I can't keep track of this anymore.

[opoudjis]

Sure. If I get advice from BSI of a different default, that's what I'll implement.

[opoudjis]

BSI have replied, and they will stick with A.1, which is what they have been using to date.