From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Wed Jul 12 19:57:16 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom8 Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom8@www.open-std.org Received: by www.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id 197C03587D7; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 19:57:16 +0200 (CEST) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from ppsw-30.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-30.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.130]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A1813569AE for ; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 19:57:14 +0200 (CEST) X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://help.uis.cam.ac.uk/email-scanner-virus Received: from hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.51]:50291) by ppsw-30.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.156]:25) with esmtpa (EXTERNAL:nmm1) id 1dVLsv-000fhI-fH (Exim 4.89) (return-path ); Wed, 12 Jul 2017 18:57:13 +0100 Received: from prayer by hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk (hermes.cam.ac.uk) with local (PRAYER:nmm1) id 1dVLsv-0005VK-PM (Exim 4.89) (return-path ); Wed, 12 Jul 2017 18:57:13 +0100 Received: from [146.199.130.7] by old-webmail.hermes.cam.ac.uk with HTTP (Prayer-1.3.5); 12 Jul 2017 18:57:13 +0100 Date: 12 Jul 2017 18:57:13 +0100 From: "N.M. Maclaren" To: Steve Lionel Cc: WG5 Subject: Re: [ukfortran] (SC22WG5.5917) (j3.2006) Preview of possible feature survey Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20170712152428.74A5B3569AE@www.open-std.org> References: <20170702233407.599BA35828D@www.open-std.org> <20170712091922.F336E3587DA@www.open-std.org> <20170712151445.1B9143587DB@www.open-std.org> <20170712152428.74A5B3569AE@www.open-std.org> X-Mailer: Prayer v1.3.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk On Jul 12 2017, Steve Lionel wrote: > >Do we have such lists already? I didn't think so, unless you meant the ones >for F2015. I did. The point about including those would be to get a feel for what the more general user community thinks about them. >I don't think it's helpful to make the list too large, >especially if we're going to stick with ranked-choice voting (which I think >gives us more information and also prompts the user to think about their >priorities.) > >The NBs can and will make their lists anyway. The idea here is to see what >users want that we may not have thought of. Then that is definitely NOT how to do it! That will cause people to think in terms of the list. If we want new ideas, we have to leave it as open as possible. Giving a list of possible areas, in EXTREMELY general terms, and NOT asking for a ranking, might be worthwhile - but even that will constrain people's thoughts. Regards, Nick.