From meissner@lynx.cs.usfca.edu Sun Apr 19 06:09:50 1992
Received: from ion.physics.usfca.edu by dkuug.dk via EUnet with SMTP (5.64+/8+bit/IDA-1.2.8)
	id AA02598; Sun, 19 Apr 92 06:09:50 +0200
Received: from lynx.cs.usfca.edu by ion.physics.usfca.edu with SMTP; 
          Sat, 18 Apr 1992 21:09:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by lynx.cs.usfca.edu (AIX 3.1/UCB 5.61/4.03)
          id AA26997; Sat, 18 Apr 92 21:07:57 -0700
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 92 21:07:57 -0700
From: meissner@lynx.cs.usfca.edu (Loren P. Meissner)
Message-Id: <9204190407.AA26997@lynx.cs.usfca.edu>
To: sc22wg5%dkuug.dk@ion
Subject: S20 in Fortran Forum
X-Charset: ASCII
X-Char-Esc: 29

 I have been convinced that the current draft of S20 is not ready for public
view, so I have sent the June issue of Fortran Forum to ACM without it.  My
deadline for the September issue is early July, so I had planned to print
the version of S20 that emerges from the May meeting of X3J3.
 But now I am having problems with space in Fortran Forum: ACM wants me to
publish 4 equally spaced 32-page issues per year, and for the first time in
history I have a backlog that is continuing for more than one issue.  I already
have enough material to fill up the 32 pages for September without the S20.
 So I am now proposing to use September to get rid of my present backlog, and
devote all 32 pages of the December issue to Fortran 90 interpretations.  (If
I can't fit it in 32 pages, it will have to spill over into 1993.)
 Inasmuch as the December issue doesn't have to go to ACM until October, this
means that WG5 will be able to review the results of X3J3's deliberations in
May, and X3J3 can even respond in August - thus we should have a fairly
stable draft by the end of the August X3J3 meeting.
- Loren Meissner