< Return to Ballot details

Vote Details

Ballot: Resolve VIRTIO-167: Confusing "non-Transitional" conformance statement
I believe this change is an improvement. I also believe it does not address all issues raised in the description of VIRTIO-167.

The list of requirements in section "7.4 Legacy Interface: Transitional Device and Transitional Driver Conformance", which is its main content, has nothing to do with conformance, and is not linked to any conformance statements. Furthermore normative language usage in 7.4 (MUST, etc) and especially the sentence "A conformant implementation MUST be either transitional or non-transitional, see 1.3.1." which looks like a normative statement but ain't tied to any conformance target.

I agree with including this change in virtio 1.1 cs01 but I don't think it resolves VIRTIO-167.