Yes that makes sense to me.

Regards

Steve Hanson

IBM Hybrid Integration, Hursley, UK
Architect, IBM DFDL
Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group
smh@uk.ibm.com
tel:+44-1962-815848
mob:+44-7717-378890
Note: I work Tuesday to Friday

From: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com>
To: DFDL-WG <dfdl-wg@ogf.org>
Date: 11/10/2019 21:48
Subject: [DFDL-WG] Tracker 333 - new bitOrder byteOrder combimation - dever to DFDL 2.0 ?
Sent by: "dfdl-wg" <dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org>

See https://redmine.ogf.org/issues/333

This tracker was to add the leastSignificantBitFirst bigEndian combination to the legal values. for bitOrder byteOrder

I propose this is deferred to DFDL 2.0.

While we have seen one case where this does appear to be used, it is not significant enough to warrant this change in DFDL v1.0.

Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Tresys Technology | www.tresys.com
Please note: Contributions to the DFDL Workgroup's email discussions are subject to the OGF Intellectual Property Policy
-- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg@ogf.org https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU