Closed opoudjis closed 11 months ago
Thanks for raising this @opoudjis . This means that the IEC Identifier class needs to be split into types just like as it is done in ISO. @mico can you please help?
@ronaldtse @opoudjis could you please provide me real examples of identifiers using these stages? Cannot find any.
@ronaldtse What is "ISH" deliverable? I cannot find any "ISH" identifiers, also cannot see it in types list:
Only can find "ISH" stages for working documents:
38/687/DISH
38/692/RVDISH
ISH = Interpretation Sheet. In https://github.com/metanorma/pubid-iec/issues/52 , defined as a supplement to a document like amendments and corrigenda.
ISH = Interpretation Sheet. In #52 , defined as a supplement to a document like amendments and corrigenda.
@opoudjis Could you help me find any examples?
I just googled IEC ISH, and first hit was:
https://www.iec.ch/publications/interpretation-sheets
IEC 60076-11:2018/ISH1:2020 IEC 60079-0:2017/ISH1:2019 IEC 60079-0:2017/ISH2:2019
So, again, ISH is acting just like Corrigenda.
Stages are type-specific. In my code:
This is not reflected in pubid-iec. stages.yaml recognises that 50.00 maps to all of DECDISH, DECFDIS, RDISH, RFDIS, TDISH, TDTR, TDTS, but it makes no type-based (or other) differentiation between them:
I'll add that Information Sheets (the ISH in DECDISH) are not listed in lib/pubid/iec/identifier/*rb as a distinct class of identifier at all.