From Miles.Ellis@etrc.ox.ac.uk Thu Nov 6 10:50:41 1997 Received: from oxmail4.ox.ac.uk ([163.1.2.33]) by dkuug.dk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA04200 for ; Thu, 6 Nov 1997 10:50:39 +0100 Received: from ermine.ox.ac.uk by oxmail4 with SMTP (PP) with ESMTP; Thu, 6 Nov 1997 09:50:00 +0000 Received: from [163.1.85.1] (com1.etrc.ox.ac.uk [163.1.85.1]) by ermine.ox.ac.uk (1.1/8.8.3) with ESMTP id JAA32118 for ; Thu, 6 Nov 1997 09:49:58 GMT Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 09:49:58 GMT X-Sender: mellis@ermine.ox.ac.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: "WG5 members (list)" From: Miles Ellis Subject: Conditional Compilation - Registration and Final CD Ballot I have just received notification that the Concurrent Registration and FINAL CD Ballots for Part 3 of the Fortran Standard are under way and will end on April 9th 1998. Since this will be our first FCD ballot, it is appropriate to remind everyone of the new procedures. In future, the DIS ballot will be a simple YES/NO ballot at the JTC1 level, with no comments allowed. Because of its nature, this is a two month ballot. If a document fails its DIS ballot then there must be another successful CD ballot before it may return to the DIS ballot stage. At the same time, there are now two types of CD ballot - a regular CD ballot and a FINAL CD ballot - both balloted at the SC level. The regular CD ballot is a three month (+ 14 days) ballot, and is much the same as the CD ballot in the previous system. The FINAL CD ballot must be designated as such, lasts for four months (+ 14 days), and has slightly different voting rules. In effect, the FCD ballot replaces the old DIS ballot as the last time that any changes can be made. The assumption is that there will normally be at least one CD ballot before the FCD ballot, but it is permissible for an SC to proceed directly to an FCD ballot if it believes that the document is ready for that final stage. If there is substantial objection in that ballot then the only real cost is that the FCD ballot is longer than the regular CD ballot. However, a WG that kept submitting documents for FCD ballots that failed would not be looked on favourably! In this case, everyone concerned seemed to be happy that the document that we discussed in Vienna, as slightly modified, was as close as we could get it to a final document, and so I asked the Plenary in Ottawa for permission to submit it directly for its FCD ballot. Which is what is happening. It is, perhaps, worth pointing out that WG5 traditionally attempts to get its documents into as close as possible to their final form before submitting them for formal SC22 ballots, and usually carry out its own informal ballots before sending documents on to SC22. This is not the way that all WGs work, and some even submit documents at a quite early stage of their development for review by SC22. Unless there is likely to be controversy, therefore, it is not unreasonable for WG5 to go straight to FCD ballots in a way that other WGs might not consider. If all goes according to plan, therefore, this FCD will be the only ballot that there will be on Part 3, since if it passes that ballot, the document, with any amendments resulting from comments made during the ballot, will go for a two month DIS ballot. This could start as early as the beginning of May if there were no technical comments during the ballot, or shortly after the June meeting of WG5 if there are sufficient technical issues raised to require a final decision to be deferred to that meeting. The important message, therefore, is to ensure that your national bodies make any and all comments that they have in this balot, because they probably will not have another chance! ------------------------------------------------------------ Dr Miles Ellis Director: Educational Technology Resources Centre University of Oxford, 37 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/Miles_Ellis.html