From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Thu Jun 1 01:03:01 2017 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 D6A69358633; Thu, 1 Jun 2017 01:03:01 +0200 (CEST) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org X-Greylist: delayed 1434 seconds by postgrey-1.34 at www5.open-std.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2017 01:03:01 CEST Received: from mail.jpl.nasa.gov (mailhost.jpl.nasa.gov [128.149.139.109]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28A6535696E for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Thu, 1 Jun 2017 01:02:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [137.79.7.57] (math.jpl.nasa.gov [137.79.7.57]) by smtp.jpl.nasa.gov (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1) with ESMTP id v4VMcxmB002279 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128 bits) verified NO) for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Wed, 31 May 2017 15:39:01 -0700 Subject: Re: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5865) N2126 From: Van Snyder <Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov> Reply-To: Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov To: WG5 <sc22wg5@open-std.org> In-Reply-To: <20170531211201.63EF43587D7@www.open-std.org> References: <20170531211201.63EF43587D7@www.open-std.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Organization: Yes Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 15:38:59 -0700 Message-ID: <1496270339.20046.66.camel@math.jpl.nasa.gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.3 (2.32.3-37.el6) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Source-Sender: Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov X-AUTH: Authorized Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk On Wed, 2017-05-31 at 22:11 +0100, John Reid wrote: > Dear all, > > I have just posted this document: > > N2126 A Strategy for Reckoning the Content of the Next Revision (Nagle) > > A copy is attached. > > Cheers, > > John. > _______________________________________________ > J3 mailing list > J3@mailman.j3-fortran.org > http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3 I would add one thing to the process in Section V at the end: There ought to be a provision for retracting a feature and recomputing the budget.