Comma between 'third party' and 'registered' in 7.4.1.2 - Why?!

[Jim Wynne]

Gentlemen,

We have now gone way off topic. It doesn't matter about certain grammatical errors that happen. No one is perfect Gentlemen.

Get refocused on the OP.

Coury, the OP is questioning the presence of the comma, and that's what's being discussed. How is this off-topic?

 

[Vic de Beer]

As I said righ at the posting of my first post, ....it is my humble opinion.
I just fail to see how a document, scrutinized to the n'th degree, could go to print with an error that could/may cause ambiguity.
Quality, and its assurance and control, is all about black and white... right or wrong, .... guidelines, where there should be no gray areas that could cause confusion.

 

[Vic de Beer]

Do you notice my spelling error, evenm with re-reading it before posting?

 

[Sidney Vianna]

I just fail to see how a document, scrutinized to the n'th degree, could go to print with an error that could/may cause ambiguity.

Apparently, you are not aware on how most standards are developed. The process of creating and gaining consensus on standards is far from perfect. Most of the people are involved on a voluntary basis; there is a need, many times, to compromise and let somethings you vehemently object to, pass so the process can move forward.

Quality, and its assurance and control, is all about black and white... right or wrong, .... guidelines, where there should be no gray areas that could cause confusion.

The only problem with living life in black and white is that thing called reality which tends to come in shades of gray.

 

[Vic de Beer]

I am quite aware that the documents are checked and even written by volunteers, that does not mean that they are a bunch of numb-sculls doing it just for the sake of doing it, I feel that everyone is at-heart very quality orientated and have done the best they could..To come up with any set of standards is no small feat..... I know, I write Quality Management Systems documents based on ISO 9001 all the time and I allways endeavour to avoid including sentences that may or could be misinterpreted or misread.
Getting back to the issue at hand:
I can understand the difference between third-party and third party, I may not be eliquent enough to explain it, but I do understand it. Likewise I can seen how the inclusion of the comma can be interpreted in 2 ways.
I will grant you, that the inclusion of the comma has caused (as can be seen from this thread) some degree of confusion and maybe the wording could have been diferent.
However, is it not up to the interpreter to explain his/her view of what he/she reads? and, if the explanation falls within the bounds of the written word, is that not enough?
Quote
"The only problem with living life in black and white is that thing called reality which tends to come in shades of gray."

 

[Vic de Beer]

Maybe the insertion of the comma is to make the reader pause, reflect and then proceeed? Are the lines on the raod not clearly indicated or are they gray as well? That is reality.

 

[Peters]

Thank you guys.
Your discussion was impressive

 

[AndyN]

As I said righ at the posting of my first post, ....it is my humble opinion.
I just fail to see how a document, scrutinized to the n'th degree, could go to print with an error that could/may cause ambiguity.
Quality, and its assurance and control, is all about black and white... right or wrong, .... guidelines, where there should be no gray areas that could cause confusion.

It happens all the time, Vic. QS 9000 was another example......

 

[howste]

I just fail to see how a document, scrutinized to the n'th degree, could go to print with an error that could/may cause ambiguity.
Quality, and its assurance and control, is all about black and white... right or wrong, .... guidelines, where there should be no gray areas that could cause confusion.

To prove that TS 16949:2009 has errors, let me point out another obvious one. Inside the boxes, TS 16949 supposedly contains the ISO 9001:2008 text verbatim. In my copy of ISO 9001:2008, the first note under clause 4.1 states:

NOTE 1 Processes needed for the quality management system referred to above include...

However, TS 16949:2009 states:

NOTE 1 Processes needed for the quality management system referred to above should include...

It's been "scrutinized to the n'th degree" but somehow that typo ended up in the released version anyway.

 

[AndyN]

Maybe the insertion of the comma is to make the reader pause, reflect and then proceeed?

I wouldn't base a defense on that premise! How many people really know how to use commas, Vic? Most struggle to use apostrophes......