From owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org  Tue Mar 16 15:37:11 2010
Return-Path: <owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org>
X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom8
Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom8@www2.open-std.org
Received: by www2.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521)
	id 96723C3BA1E; Tue, 16 Mar 2010 15:37:11 +0100 (CET)
X-Original-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Received: from mk-filter-2-a-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-filter-2-a-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.100.53])
	by www2.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3431C178E5
	for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Tue, 16 Mar 2010 15:37:09 +0100 (CET)
X-Trace: 364623456/mk-filter-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com/B2C/$b2c-THROTTLED-DYNAMIC/b2c-CUSTOMER-DYNAMIC-IP/88.106.66.132/None/d.muxworthy@bcs.org.uk
X-SBRS: None
X-RemoteIP: 88.106.66.132
X-IP-MAIL-FROM: d.muxworthy@bcs.org.uk
X-SMTP-AUTH: 
X-MUA: Apple Mail (2.753.1)
X-IP-BHB: Once
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApEBAGo0n0tYakKE/2dsb2JhbAAH1X+EeAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,650,1262563200"; 
   d="scan'208";a="364623456"
Received: from 88-106-66-132.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com (HELO [192.168.1.2]) ([88.106.66.132])
  by smtp.tiscali.co.uk with ESMTP; 16 Mar 2010 14:37:08 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753.1)
In-Reply-To: <20100315140121.B6CCFC178E5@www2.open-std.org>
References: <20100315140121.B6CCFC178E5@www2.open-std.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <F2E68F06-A667-4759-A481-D792A4FCAA31@bcs.org.uk>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: David Muxworthy <d.muxworthy@bcs.org.uk>
Subject: Re: (SC22WG5.4219) WG5 ballot on the draft FDIS
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 14:38:57 +0000
To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753.1)
Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org
Precedence: bulk

Please answer the following question "Is N1814 ready for forwarding  
to SC22
as the FDIS for Fortran 2008?" in one of these ways.

2) Yes, but I recommend the following changes.

1.  There are bad page breaks at the bottom of pages 52, 380 and 565.

2.  Similarly on pages 151, 486, 492, 522 but of much lower, possibly
     negligible, priority.

3.  Table 2.1, split between pages 31 and 32, is not well presented; it
     was not so split in F95 or F03.  This could be resolved by  
additional
     white space on pages 30 and 31 or by interchanging subclauses 2.3.2
     and 2.3.3.

4.  The diagram of the plasma module would be improved if it were not
     split over two pages (504 & 505).  Also it should now use  
continuous
     lines rather than ASCII characters.

David Muxworthy