From owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org  Tue Feb 19 17:31:52 2008
Return-Path: <owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org>
X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom6
Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom6@open-std.org
Received: by open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521)
	id 7825BD942F; Tue, 19 Feb 2008 17:31:52 +0100 (CET)
X-Original-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Received: from oin.rl.ac.uk (oin.rl.ac.uk [130.246.135.200])
	by open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49FD538507
	for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Tue, 19 Feb 2008 17:31:35 +0100 (CET)
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 oin.rl.ac.uk (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1JGUodS019199
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Tue, 19 Feb 2008 16:30:51 GMT
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 m1JGUoAF004623;
	Tue, 19 Feb 2008 16:30:50 GMT
Message-ID: <47BB043A.8030909@rl.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 16:30:50 +0000
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: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.3514) WG5 ballot on N1718
References: <20080219154342.C4733D7A81@open-std.org> <D6E94E63-76C1-4F7A-B86C-53F6FDA4CFA7@lanl.gov>
In-Reply-To: <D6E94E63-76C1-4F7A-B86C-53F6FDA4CFA7@lanl.gov>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-CCLRC-SPAM-report: 0 : 
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.39
Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org
Precedence: bulk

Craig Rasmussen wrote:

>>
>> ...........................
>>
>>
>> Vote on N1718
>>
>> A. I have found nothing that is out of accord with our decisions in  
>> Las Vegas.
> 
> 
> Given that part of coarrays will now be a TR and will give us some  more 
> time to work out more details, I agree with our decisions in Las  Vegas.
> 
>>
>> B. I think the following corrections should be made:


Craig,

You misunderstood what this vote is about. It is not about the technical content 
- that is for your public comment. It is about whether N1718 correctly 
represents what we decided in Las Vegas. E.g., if you find an occurrence of 
"co-array", that would merit a correction.

Best wishes,

John.