From Miles.Ellis@etrc.ox.ac.uk Mon Feb 5 16:08:35 1996 Received: from oxmail3.ox.ac.uk (oxmail3.ox.ac.uk [163.1.2.9]) by dkuug.dk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA25367 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 1996 16:08:12 +0100 Received: from vax.ox.ac.uk (actually host vax) by oxmail3 with SMTP (PP); Mon, 5 Feb 1996 14:52:02 +0000 Received: from 163.1.85.1 by vax.ox.ac.uk (MX V4.2 VAX) with SMTP; Mon, 05 Feb 1996 14:29:06 +0000 X-Sender: MELLIS@vax.ox.ac.uk Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 14:32:38 +0000 To: maine From: Miles.Ellis@etrc.ox.ac.uk (Miles Ellis) Subject: Re: WG5 requested corrections to Fortran 95 CD (FOR X3J3/136) CC: sc22wg5 Rich, > >I got the subject email and will bring at least an electronic copy to Vegas. >I haven't yet had time to carefully review it, and I probably won't have >time until I get to the Vegas meeting, but I did notice one thing that I >have a question about. > >Alla Gorelik had some comments about the section headings in Chapter 13. >The misprints that he noted were clearly errors and have been fixed. >However, I disagree with his more general comment on the headings. For the record, Alla is a woman! As it is not a common name. and you were not at any of the WG5 meetings she has been able to attend, the mistake is understandable - we are a male-dominated (in numbers ;-) committee - but I thought you would like to know for future reference. > . Text omitted . > >My question (finally) is whether these are comments to be considered >or whether I/we are specifically directed to make the changes. The >body of your message implies to me that these are comments to be >considered. My personal feeling is that this issue has already been >adequately considered and can be answered by pointing out the >explanation in section 13.3. I'm also worried about getting some >of the subtle points technically wrong - some of them are subtle. > >However, the subject line "WG5 requested corrections..." >sounds like a more specific direction to make these corrections. >I'm probably just reading too much into the exact words of the >subject line. > Sorry - poor wording on my part. These are individual comments incorporating individual requests for "corrections". My intention was to pass these to you for you to deal with as you saw fit as Editor of the document (after taking any such advice as you see fit from X3J3, or, indeed, anyone else!). In other words, it is up to YOU, as Editor, to make such changes as you see fit in order to tidy up the document prior to its release to ITTF, and to do this without altering the carefully agreed positions negotiated in San Diego with respect to the results of the CD ballot - positions which appear to have been accepted by all parties concerned (with just a little doubt with regard to UK point 5 which I hope can be resolved in Las Vegas). I am confident that this task is in safe hands. Good luck! Miles P.S. I am copying this to WG5 (a) because your reply to me was sent to the full list, and (b) in the hope that someone at the X3J3 meeting will be checking their email and can pass this to you, in the event that you are not able to do this yourself. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr Miles Ellis Director: Educational Technology Resources Centre University of Oxford, 37-41 Wellington Square, Oxford OX1 2JF, ENGLAND Telephone: +44 1865 270528 Fax: +44 1865 270527 Email: Miles.Ellis@etrc.ox.ac.uk WWW: http://www.etrc.ox.ac.uk/Personal/Miles_Ellis.html