Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Review 14.018: Amputated or bandaged (AMP) #27

Open
Jeremy-M-Int opened this issue May 9, 2022 · 3 comments
Open

Review 14.018: Amputated or bandaged (AMP) #27

Jeremy-M-Int opened this issue May 9, 2022 · 3 comments
Labels
Pending INSIWG Review To be reviewed at the INSIWG

Comments

@Jeremy-M-Int
Copy link
Collaborator

At the minute the NIST Standard states:

  • XX shall be used only when a partial print exists due to amputation; therefore it contains some friction ridge detail. (The finger is not totally amputated, some countries might qualify such print as “mutiliated”)
  • UP shall be used with the complete block where an image was to be transmitted, but there is no image due to amputation or total lack of friction ridge detail (such as with a bandage).

XX should actually mean that the finger is "Amputated" and therefore not retrievable.
UP should actually mean that the finger is temporarily missing (Bandaged, Damaged, Missing) and can be retrieved later on.

@Jeremy-M-Int
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This is linked to #6

@Jeremy-M-Int Jeremy-M-Int added the Pending INSIWG Review To be reviewed at the INSIWG label May 21, 2024
@tsaracouvert
Copy link
Collaborator

Proposal to the NIST working group to be added

@tsaracouvert
Copy link
Collaborator

MRT to be updated accordingly

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Pending INSIWG Review To be reviewed at the INSIWG
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants