Clarify RateString description and examples
Closed this issue · 4 comments
Description
A small number of queries regarding the format of the RateString type suggests the description and examples could be improved.
Related Work Items
Change the current detail:
| Type | Description | Valid Examples |
|---|---|---|
| RateString | A string representing a percentage (e.g. an interest rate). A rate of 100% would be represented by the value 1.0 and a rate of -100% by -1.0 - At least 1 and up to a total of 16 significant digits before decimal point - Up to 16 digits following the decimal point - No formatting, eg thousand separating commas |
“0.05”(=5%)“-0.05” (=-5%)“12.3456789” (=1234.56789%)“-99.123456789123” (=9912.3456789123%) |
To:
| Type | Description | Valid Examples |
|---|---|---|
| RateString | A string representing a percentage (e.g., an interest rate or ratio). For example, a rate of 100% would be represented by the value "1" and a rate of -100% by "-1"- At least 1 and up to a total of 16 significant digits before a decimal point - Up to 16 digits following a decimal point if required - No formatting, e.g., thousand separating commas. |
|
Note: Bold and code words in the updated description indicate change/addition.
Looks good. Just to clarify, this is intended to be purely a description change. It isn't an actual change in the standard itself. Is that correct?
Yes, it's intended to be a description change, in response to questions such as -
- Is "0" acceptable or does the RateString format require "0.0"?
The update is an attempt to clarify that "0" and "0.0" or "1" and "1.0" could be assumed to be equivalent and that a decimal may only be present if required, which may not have been clear in the previous documentation.
Participants would be advised to confirm whether this clarification would impact their systems.
Incorporated into Standards v1.32.0