From owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org  Fri Jun 30 11:08:13 2006
Return-Path: <owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org>
X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dmo5
Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dmo5@open-std.org
Received: by open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521)
	id E9BAB23772; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 11:08:13 +0200 (CET DST)
X-Original-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Received: from balin.rl.ac.uk (balin.rl.ac.uk [130.246.135.155])
	by open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A8EB2167E
	for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 11:08:11 +0200 (CET DST)
X-RAL-MFrom: <j.k.reid@rl.ac.uk>
X-RAL-Connect: <jkr.cse.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.202]>
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 k5U986xb031318;
	Fri, 30 Jun 2006 10:08:06 +0100
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by jkr.cse.rl.ac.uk (8.12.10/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k5U986o8024282;
	Fri, 30 Jun 2006 10:08:06 +0100
Message-ID: <44A4E9F6.8040409@rl.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 10:08:06 +0100
From: John Reid <j.k.reid@rl.ac.uk>
Reply-To: j.k.reid@rl.ac.uk
Organization: Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20060209 Fedora/1.7.12-1.1.2.legacy
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: WG5 <sc22wg5@open-std.org>
Subject: Re: [ukfortran] (SC22WG5.3402) WG5 Vote on Corrigendum 2
References: <20060629183933.1B05C216ED@open-std.org>
In-Reply-To: <20060629183933.1B05C216ED@open-std.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.39
Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org
Precedence: bulk

Rob James wrote:
> Vote on N1660 (anyone may vote):
> 
> No, for the following reasons:
> 
> In subclause 4.4.4.1, while I do agree that "or <derived-type-spec>" needs
> to be in the edit for [41:9+], I believe that the "or <derived-type-spec>"
> at [41:33+] is incorrect.  This list is about the meaning of an asterisk
> for a <char-length>, which can't appear in a <derived-type-spec>.  If the
> text "or <derived-type-spec>" is removed from the edit for [41:33+], I'll
> change my vote to a yes.

Yes, I agree and am changing my personal vote to support this change.

It would be very helpful to me as convener to have opinions on this from as many 
people as possible. There is just a week to go before the ballot ends.

Best wishes,

John.