From owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Thu Jul 8 18:07:55 2004 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by dkuug.dk (8.12.10/8.9.2) id i68G7tRD017224 for sc22wg5-domo; Thu, 8 Jul 2004 18:07:55 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk) X-Authentication-Warning: ptah.dkuug.dk: majordom set sender to owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk using -f Received: from balin.rl.ac.uk (balin.rl.ac.uk [130.246.135.155]) by dkuug.dk (8.12.10/8.9.2) with ESMTP id i68G7jE7017218 for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2004 18:07:50 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from j.k.reid@rl.ac.uk) X-RAL-MFrom: X-RAL-Connect: Received: from jkr.cse.rl.ac.uk (jkr.cse.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.202]) by balin.rl.ac.uk (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i68G9hrF014692; Thu, 8 Jul 2004 17:09:43 +0100 Received: from rl.ac.uk (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by jkr.cse.rl.ac.uk (8.12.10/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i68G9HVA000512; Thu, 8 Jul 2004 17:09:17 +0100 Message-ID: <40ED71AC.5020607@rl.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 17:09:16 +0100 From: John Reid Reply-To: j.k.reid@rl.ac.uk Organization: Rutherford Appleton Laboratory User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Subject: Re: (j3.2004) (SC22WG5.3145) Protocol for deciding content of next revision after Fortran 2003 References: <200406292343.i5TNhVCx012439@dkuug.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.39 X-Spam-Score: 0 () Sender: owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Precedence: bulk Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov wrote: > During the development of Fortran 2003, on a few occasions J3 spent more > time arguing whether a feature was within the remit from WG5 than it would > have taken simply to do it. > > I would like to propose a modification of the working relation between > WG5 and J3 that would avoid some of these arguments, and allow more to be > done while still keeping to the agreed schedule. > > I propose that WG5 develop separate lists of "must do" and "may do" projects. > I propose that the "may do" list be allowed to be arbitrarily large, but > that things must be added to it explicitly by WG5 agreement. The projects > on the "may do" list should not necessarily be limited to ones that WG5 > anticipates are sufficiently small that specs, syntax and edits could be > handled by one paper at one meeting. I propose that J3 not work on any > "may do" papers on any particular day until all "must do" papers and > discussion ready for consideration on that day are completed, and then only > if members agree that time permits. > > Arguments of the form "we don't have time to do it so it shouldn't be > considered" would then not waste our time. Arguments of the form "that's > fancier than WG5 authorized" would still be in order. > Sorry, Van, not to have replied earlier to you on this. What you propose is actually very similar to what we did last time, see N1259. And, using the scale of N1594, I think we are talking about level 4 changes. I would not expect level 3 changes to need explicit authorization from WG5. We will need to discuss all this properly when we meet next year in Delft. Best wishes, John.