Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 17:16:50 -0500 (EST)
From: William Rinehuls <rinehuls@Radix.Net>
cc: keld simonsen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: SC22 N2889 - Minutes of WG19 January 26, 1999 Meeting
______________________ beginning of title page ______________________
ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22
Programming languages, their environments and system software interfaces
Secretariat: U.S.A. (ANSI)
ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22
Minutes of SC22/WG19 (Formal Specification Languages) and Z Rapporteur
Group Meeting on January 26, 1999 in Cambridge, United Kingdom
Secretariat, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22
Addres reply to:
ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22 Secretariat
William C. Rinehuls
8457 Rushing Creek Court
Springfield, VA 22153 USA
Telephone: +1 (703) 912-9680
Fax: +1 (703) 912-2973
_____________ end of title page; beginning of minutes ________________
MINUTES OF SC22/WG19 AND Z RAPPORTEUR GROUP MEETING
JANUARY 26, 1999 in CAMBRIDGE, UNITED KINGDOM
The meeting was held at 10.30am on Tuesday 26th January 1999 at Logica,
Jon Hall, Steve King (chairman), Susan Stepney,
Ian Toyn, Sam Valentine.
49.1 Appointment of secretary for meeting:
SK took the minutes.
49.2 Apologies for absence from meeting:
Marc Benveniste, Randolph Johnson, Andrew Martin, John Nicholls,
Alf Smith, John Wordsworth
49.3 Minutes of last meeting and matters arising:
The minutes of panel meeting 48 were agreed as an accurate record, except
that in carrying forward Action 47.5.2 it should have been explicitly
numbered Action 48.3.2.
Action 48.3.1: carried forward
ACTION 49.3.1 HTML Issues list (John Wordsworth)
Action 48.3.2: carried forward. Note that IT's Version 1.6 includes a
possible source of material for this proposal.
ACTION 49.3.2 Proposal for extension to Conformance clause (Mark Saaltink)
Action 48.5.1: completed: see discussion below.
Action 48.5.2: carried forward.
ACTION 49.3.3 Produce sample clauses in the style of Version 1.2, based
on the technical content of 1.5. It was requested that this action might be
completed within one week of the issuing of the minutes. Note again that
there is material in 1.6 which could form the basis of this work.
49.4 Z Project Editor's report on the status of the CD
The Project Editor reported that he had revised proposals (see below). He had
also done some work on improving Version 1.5, resulting in Version 1.6, which
contains the latest work: this could form the basis for later proposals. There
was some concern about the proliferation of documents, and the possibility
for confusion between those that represented an accepted latest working draft
of the Panel, and those that had been produced by the Project Editor to
show the effect of possible changes. It was agreed that a new numbering
scheme would be useful. See under 49.5 below.
49.5 Convener's report on outstanding Z proposals
SK read the Convener's Report:
'The proposals IT.49.1 to IT.49.25 are approved, as no objections have
been received, and one or two comments in favour. The way is now clear
for the Project Editor to prepare a new draft that incorporates the
proposals. I should like to thank the members of the panel who
contributed to this major step in the progress to the next CD.
The Proposal APM.49.1 has been debated by email, but no consensus has
Following the discussion above, it was suggested that the new `accepted
current version' should be numbered 2.0, and that any `tentative'
versions which the Project Editor might choose to produce to show the
effect of a proposed change should be numbered in a separate series 2.A,
2.B and so on.
ACTION 49.5.1 Produce a new version of the Standard (2.0) which
represents the latest version accepted by the Panel. (Ian Toyn)
Discussion of Proposal APM.49.1 revealed that it was very similar to a
proposal of SS from last year, later withdrawn. Since this proposal has
failed to achieve consensus, it is up to APM to revise/re-submit if he
ACTION 49.5.2 Revise/re-submit proposal APM.49.1 if desired. (Andrew
[IT doubts whether there needs to be an explicit action for this.]
There was also a short discussion of Wolfgang's proposals, which were
originally submitted before Meeting 48. It was agreed that these were
valuable contributions to the discussions, but that they needed to be
expressed with respect to the newly-accepted Version 2.0. Once they were
expressed in this way, they could be properly discussed and decided
ACTION 49.5.3 Revise/re-submit proposals (Wolfgang Grieskamp)
49.6 Schedule of further meetings:
deadline for proposals: 9/3/99
27/7/99 ?London (Chiswick)
/9/99 Toulouse (FM99)
49.7 Any Other Business
1. SS reported that Jonathan Jacky had emailed to inform her that ANSI
Committee X3/J21 has met, concerning Unicode, offering to propose changes
to Unicode for Z and VDM. With our support, they're willing to continue
this work. There was agreement that we should delegate this task to ANSI.
ACTION 49.7.1 Contact JJ expressing support, and offer her earlier
work (Susan Stepney)
2. After the main portion of the meeting, technical discussions were
held, with the purpose of offering advice to the Project Editor on
various issues. Since these discussions were only between 5 people, it
was not appropriate that they should be regarded as part of the
main business of the meeting, so the record of that part of the meeting
is held separately as an Aide-memoire, in Document Z-245. However, the
Actions which were regarded as desirable are recorded here, so that they
can be followed up.
ACTION 49.7.2 JBW: to circulate all those known to have raised `Issues',
asking them to re-raise them with respect to Version 2.0.
ACTION 49.7.3 SS to propose an Informative Note, showing a redundant
second rule for the transformation of free types, which could use toolkit
ACTION 49.7.4 SV,SS: to propose that toolkit should be sectioned
ACTION 49.7.5 JBW: to propose updating of Toolkit narrative
ACTION 49.7.6 IT to produce proposal that all ZF notation should be in
ACTION 49.7.7 SS to produce proposal for an informative NOTE in the Prelude.
ACTION 49.7.8 SK to ask RDA for comment on undefinedness issues, within
a week. If positive response, SHV to draft Proposal for EED loose.
ACTION 49.7.9 DRJ has already volunteered to help with definitions for
Tables 4 and 9
ACTION 49.7.10 MS to give an example of the problem on p38 of Version
Meeting closed at 11am.
______________________ end of SC22 N2889 ___________________________