>
> If this is *fixed* as you suggest, then replication of the table is fine
> with a citation to the authority.
>
> My concern was that if this wasn't stable, that it reflected conversion
> to and from Euro currency, then replication of a table might not be a
> good idea.
>
> Understanding it as a legacy function changes the wording of the text.
>
The former national currencies could be called "legacy", but the function
itself is still applicable to calculations today. But I think the term
most used is "national currencies" rather than "legacy currencies".
Also note that this function could be revised (and likely will)in the
future as additional countries join the Eurozone. In fact, this is not
just a likelihood but almost inevitable, so I wonder whether we can define
this to be future-proof? For example, allow it to be expanded to include
additional currencies, according to the already-defined ISO currency
codes, for future fixed conversion factors as may be promulgated by the
Council. Otherwise we would need to scramble with an amendment whenever a
new country adopts the Euro, which happens every couple of years.
-Rob
