From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org  Fri Dec  6 20:10:00 2013
Return-Path: <owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org>
X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom8
Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom8@www.open-std.org
Received: by www.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521)
	id 248EC9DB114; Fri,  6 Dec 2013 20:10:00 +0100 (CET)
Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
X-Greylist: delayed 589 seconds by postgrey-1.34 at www5.open-std.org; Fri, 06 Dec 2013 20:09:59 CET
Received: from out.ipsmtp1nec.opaltelecom.net (out.ipsmtp1nec.opaltelecom.net [62.24.202.73])
	by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1974356D51
	for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Fri,  6 Dec 2013 20:09:58 +0100 (CET)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AnkDALIdolJYaPBd/2dsb2JhbAANTL0SAgKBOYMaAQEEgQkLRle4QJBbF48XFoMKgRMDrVA
X-IPAS-Result: AnkDALIdolJYaPBd/2dsb2JhbAANTL0SAgKBOYMaAQEEgQkLRle4QJBbF48XFoMKgRMDrVA
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,842,1378854000"; 
   d="scan'208";a="71946582"
Received: from 88-104-240-93.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com (HELO [192.168.1.2]) ([88.104.240.93])
  by out.ipsmtp1nec.opaltelecom.net with ESMTP; 06 Dec 2013 19:00:07 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\))
Subject: Re: (SC22WG5.5116) Vote on revised draft DTS
From: David Muxworthy <d.muxworthy@bcs.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20131107223812.7654C3581D9@www.open-std.org>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 19:00:06 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <319DB17B-A2E5-482C-9245-59BD164D6656@bcs.org.uk>
References: <20131107223812.7654C3581D9@www.open-std.org>
To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1822)
Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org
Precedence: bulk

Is N1996 ready for forwarding to SC22 as the DTS?

3) No, for the following reasons.

Clearly, consensus on the design has not yet been achieved.  Whether
the eventual design can be implemented satisfactorily on multiple
platforms is still to be proved.  The statement about inclusion in the
next revision of ISO/IEC 1539-1 (Introduction paragraph 5) should
refer instead to =93a future revision=94.

David



