Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
|||
Line 23:
:*C<SUB>pk</SUB> does not take the target, T, into account according to NIST (http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/pmc/section1/pmc16.htm) or Montgomery (http://he-cda.wiley.com/WileyCDA/HigherEdTitle/productCd-0471656313.html). Perhaps you're thinking of a variant on C<SUB>pk</SUB> that does? — [[User:DanielPenfield|DanielPenfield]] 16:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Is there a missing word in the following clause? 'is', maybe? And is this English? I'd much prefer "Because the process capability..."
<blockquote>
Being the process capability a function of the specification
</blockquote>
--[[Special:Contributions/71.10.226.43|71.10.226.43]] ([[User talk:71.10.226.43|talk]]) 12:28, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
| |||