CVS difference for ai05s/ai05-0098-1.txt

--- ai05s/ai05-0098-1.txt	2008/05/24 04:36:54	1.1
+++ ai05s/ai05-0098-1.txt	2008/07/11 04:18:09	1.2
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
-!standard  3.10.1(6)                                  08-05-23  AI05-0098-1/01
+!standard  3.10.1(6)                                  08-07-10  AI05-0098-1/02
 !standard  3.10.1(9.2/2)
 !class binding interpretation 08-05-23
+!status ARG Approved  8-0-0  08-06-21
 !status work item 08-05-23
 !status received 06-04-18
 !priority Low
@@ -20,7 +21,7 @@
 a formal_part; that neatly covers both named and anonymous access types (as
 well as normal subprograms).
 
-However, 3/10/1(9.2/2) specifically says access_to_subprogram_definition for
+However, 3.10.1(9.2/2) specifically says access_to_subprogram_definition for
 a similar rule. Which means that anonymous access-to-subprogram types are
 *not* covered by this rule. That means that the following is legal:
 
@@ -59,7 +60,7 @@
 
 * as the subtype_mark in the subtype_indication of an access_to_object_definition;
 the only form of constraint allowed in this subtype_indication is a
-discriminant_constraint{ and no null_exclusion is allowed};
+discriminant_constraint{ (no null_exclusion is allowed)};
 
 Modify 3.10.1(9.2/2) as follows:
 * as the subtype_mark defining the subtype of a parameter or result of an
@@ -94,8 +95,8 @@
 @dby
 @xbullet<as the @fa<subtype_mark> in the @fa<subtype_indication> of an
 @fa<access_to_object_definition>; the only form of @fa<constraint> allowed
-in this @fa<subtype_indication> is a @fa<discriminant_constraint> and
-no @fa<null_exclusion> is allowed;>
+in this @fa<subtype_indication> is a @fa<discriminant_constraint> (no
+@fa<null_exclusion> is allowed);>
 
 !corrigendum 3.10.1(9.2/2)