From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom9=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Thu Feb 2 16:18:10 2023 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom9 Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom9@www.open-std.org Received: by www.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id A441F358FED; Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:18:10 +0100 (CET) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from mail-wm1-f46.google.com (mail-wm1-f46.google.com [209.85.128.46]) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62F46358F7C for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2023 16:18:10 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm1-f46.google.com with SMTP id n28-20020a05600c3b9c00b003ddca7a2bcbso1659227wms.3 for ; Thu, 02 Feb 2023 07:18:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=g-edogawa-u-ac-jp.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=LM9UYD/L8qVE3qpF8THLbSViMLVI9/WOUVt0PK8ziaw=; b=Yrz0R9QxX5Lo2fnhJGs9hFeIvcvAcjWbT0CntytGB2/vfI1/cFD4HrD5/wjltStxt3 xtCkxxLcFBeSs9w107yaPbiE7rIg9TKb8AfEBUhIa24s2hVIBI77c6Per2AfLKNZpi0p 7o1eKAdg/iCLv5Bm8K3ANQZdQ8x4lQbzsLjsaPk07ORBS5joR82+iRak2UmfpJp9xW0M jEZbFM8Vl0s8lWkYcsXJbLhfDx/mr7cW5jeEpJ5U5E+4WC1X2BqO72DuPMk723QB+phj O+1pa6zSwV5mwCUUdmU9wN1ozSr4owWViPqa7hA5f9ODU2S1lI469XPZk3sa7tOenfq0 OEdw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=LM9UYD/L8qVE3qpF8THLbSViMLVI9/WOUVt0PK8ziaw=; b=VDUhPN6khZFwLBzRMKC9ZxXtTXZAn15mbzSTOcaZuvipHYeCxEmeqql70k2qToQ/PE EkLd1HHp00PCXZoEGxIXSzaCSpH7SKa4O9aEYXWBRVec009z2U3Nf5TFao+BI47riTsd 4c9CmlvYejZ2Nl2uIN5JYIzj9xPblOb32OMiMKFbDOlh2QRtoVnyCY/SZ3vbLUjvg2DE RLpy+HlAkPgC8QUlAYyHGbOgeMGATmfZZm8HaVnbPJOElhHaiZA6i84/QElAjSJ/Y7EA NfhzHdnaGQ5ZlhQNJrRLcJ8LUB9YOGv4iE1Tb3m9ObIE1IGa+/r2CqfrXL9ngXBnh0YI lg5Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKXnHi/wvfjyzlZfMCsP2cnTGSR9d31viXfzM3YdA+Q3m242BdR4 dS+N6KlDVgQ8E/jSDKIjWo+rKczqXraZkuvGtdmZkqx63F5DYGlS X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set/XQQNpOr8HvqOPoxZrY4BgZqTvx0BM3znw3I1Esge1rd3Nb9yL+l9AKGr4aAkgGLsTwvSjdNvH/T9oLIEGoAI= X-Received: by 2002:a7b:ca4c:0:b0:3dc:5963:9f68 with SMTP id m12-20020a7bca4c000000b003dc59639f68mr206228wml.69.1675351089564; Thu, 02 Feb 2023 07:18:09 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20230201152213.D1BFB358FD7@www.open-std.org> In-Reply-To: <20230201152213.D1BFB358FD7@www.open-std.org> From: Masayuki Takata Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2023 00:17:58 +0900 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [SC22WG5.6423] F2023 DIS ballot results and comments To: WG5 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000915c3d05f3b9128d" Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk --000000000000915c3d05f3b9128d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Steve and all, On reference numbering, I prefer to keep the current form, i.e. with paragraph numbers, without line numbers. Referencing (sub)clause + paragraph has various advantages. Useless to say, line numbers are quite useful for us, J3 and WG5. So, using both is the best between us. But, if the official standard had the line numbers, we would lose the excuse to expose the nearly-final drafts. Thus, we should continue the current practice. FYI: I'm explaining about the Japanese version, i.e. (perhaps) the only non-English national standard. F2003 didn't have any numbers. There was no Japanese version for F2008. And, JIS F2018 was to be the first JIS that had paragraph numbers. But, we gave up the numbering, due to the short development time. (We gave priority to good technical terms, translation accuracy, and incorporating corrigenda.) Paragraph numbers will be added to JIS F2023, provided that the international version has them. Obviously, an English word is not necessarily correspond to a Japanese word. Similarly, an English sentence is not necessarily correspond to a Japanese sentence; grammatical difference often makes it hard to keep such one-to-one correspondence, together with readability. Sometimes, a very long English sentence becomes a short Japanese sentence and an itemized list. Even in such a case, we will retain the original numbering. In this situation, correspondence between numbered paragraphs is always guaranteed, and correspondence between sentences in a numbered paragraphs is still one-to-one in most cases. At the exceptional places where it is not, the difference would not be a big problem in most cases, and if it is, you can finally consult the English version or rely on someone familiar to it. Line numbers in the English text does not help, at all, the readers of the Japanese version. Regards, Makki 2023=E5=B9=B42=E6=9C=882=E6=97=A5(=E6=9C=A8) 0:22 Steve Lionel : > Hello all! > > The ballot for the F2023 DIS has ended, with 12 out of 12 P-members votin= g > approval. There are numerous comments, the majority of them editorial or > minor technical; some of these already have J3 papers about them. You can > find the collated comments at 23-112.pdf (j3-fortran.org) > > > We will need papers at J3 m229 addressing the comments, though I don't > think we need them for things such as "you used the wrong font". It would > be great if subgroup heads would coordinate responses and get papers > written before the meeting, especially as it's a short week. What we ofte= n > do is have one paper per subgroup that covers multiple comments related t= o > that subgroup. I think this will be a straightforward task, as many of th= e > comments have already been discussed and have suggested edits. > > On a related note, many of you are aware that, in the past, ISO has asked > us to remove line numbers from the final document submitted. Now they are > saying that while they would prefer neither paragraph nor line numbers, w= e > can use either or both if we want - we just have to get SC22 to request > permission to do so and SC22 has said we can do whatever we think best he= re > and they'll handle the paperwork. > > The argument against line numbers is that, especially when the document i= s > translated, they can change. Paragraph numbers don't change within a > revision, but do between revisions (though ISO seems to think otherwise.) > Note that whatever decision we make here, it does not affect the J3 > "Interpretation document" which will have both paragraph and line numbers= . > Does anyone have strong opinions about whether we should put line numbers > back in the official standard? I'd like to keep the paragraph numbers and > don't care about line numbers. Malcolm says it's a one or two line change > in his macros. If you have comments on this, please respond to the WG5 li= st > - those on the J3 list should not just reply to the email. > > Thanks again for all your efforts - we're almost there! > > Steve > --=20 Takata, Masayuki Edogawa University, emeritus professor email: takata@g.edogawa-u.ac.jp --000000000000915c3d05f3b9128d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi, Steve and all,
On reference numbering, I prefer to keep the current form, i.e.= with paragraph numbers, without line numbers.

Ref= erencing (sub)clause + paragraph has various advantages.=C2=A0=C2=A0 Useles= s to say, line numbers are quite useful
for us, J3 and WG5.= =C2=A0=C2=A0 So, using both is the best between us.=C2=A0=C2=A0 But, if the= official standard had the line numbers,
we would lose the e= xcuse to expose the nearly-final drafts.=C2=A0=C2=A0 Thus, we should contin= ue the current practice.

FYI:=C2=A0 I'm ex= plaining about the Japanese version, i.e. (perhaps) the only non-English na= tional standard.

F2003 didn't have any numbers= .=C2=A0=C2=A0 There was no Japanese version for F2008.=C2=A0=C2=A0 And, JIS= F2018 was to be the
first JIS that had paragraph numbers.= =C2=A0=C2=A0 But, we gave up the numbering, due to the short development ti= me.
(We gave priority to good technical terms, translation accuracy, and incorporating corrigenda.)

Paragraph numbers will be added to JIS F2023, provided that the internat= ional version has them.=C2=A0 Obviously,
an English word is = not necessarily correspond to a Japanese word.=C2=A0=C2=A0 Similarly, an En= glish sentence is not
necessarily correspond to a Japanese s= entence; grammatical difference often makes it hard to keep such
=
one-to-one correspondence, together with readability.=C2=A0=C2=A0 Some= times, a very long English sentence becomes
a short Japanese= sentence and an itemized list.=C2=A0=C2=A0 Even in such a case, we will re= tain the original numbering.

In this situation, correspondence between numbered paragraphs is always guaranteed, and correspondence
between sentences in a numbered paragraphs is still one-to-one in = most cases.=C2=A0=C2=A0 At the exceptional places
where it i= s not, the difference would not be a big problem in most cases, and if it i= s, you can finally consult
the English version or rely on so= meone familiar to it.=C2=A0=C2=A0 Line numbers in the English text does not= help, at all,
the readers of the Japanese version.

Regards,

Makki
=

2023=E5=B9=B42=E6=9C=882=E6=97=A5(=E6=9C=A8) 0:22 Steve Lio= nel <steve@st= evelionel.com>:
=20 =20 =20

Hello all!

The ballot for the F2023 DIS has ended, with 12 out of 12 P-members voting approval. There are numerous comments, the majority of them editorial or minor technical; some of these already have J3 papers about them. You can find the collated comments at 23-112.pdf (j3-fortran.org)

We will need papers at J3 m229 addressing the comments, though I don't think we need them for things such as "you used the wr= ong font". It would be great if subgroup heads would coordinate responses and get papers written before the meeting, especially as it's a short week. What we often do is have one paper per subgrou= p that covers multiple comments related to that subgroup. I think this will be a straightforward task, as many of the comments have already been discussed and have suggested edits.

On a related note, many of you are aware that, in the past, ISO has asked us to remove line numbers from the final document submitted. Now they are saying that while they would prefer neither paragraph nor line numbers, we can use either or both if we want - we just have to get SC22 to request permission to do so and SC22 has said we can do whatever we think best here and they'll handle the paperwork.

The argument against line numbers is that, especially when the document is translated, they can change. Paragraph numbers don't change within a revision, but do between revisions (though ISO seems to think otherwise.) Note that whatever decision we make here, it does not affect the J3 "Interpretation document" w= hich will have both paragraph and line numbers. Does anyone have strong opinions about whether we should put line numbers back in the official standard? I'd like to keep the paragraph numbers and don't care about line numbers. Malcolm says it's a one or two= line change in his macros. If you have comments on this, please respond to the WG5 list - those on the J3 list should not just reply to the email.

Thanks again for all your efforts - we're almost there!

Steve


--
Takata, Masayuki<= br>
Edogawa University, emeritus professor
--000000000000915c3d05f3b9128d--