From martin@ocfmail.ocf.llnl.gov Mon Aug 31 22:25:34 1992 Received: from [134.9.48.4] by dkuug.dk via EUnet with SMTP (5.64+/8+bit/IDA-1.2.8) id AA18963; Mon, 31 Aug 92 22:25:34 +0200 Received: by ocfmail.ocf.llnl.gov (4.1/SMI-4.0) id AA14060; Mon, 31 Aug 92 13:25:56 PDT Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 13:25:56 PDT From: martin@ocfmail.ocf.llnl.gov (Jeanne Martin) Message-Id: <9208312025.AA14060@ocfmail.ocf.llnl.gov> To: SC22WG5@dkuug.dk Subject: SC22 Resolutions X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 To: WG5 From: Jeanne Martin, Convenor Subject: SC22 Resolutions, etc. SC22 met last week in Finland. This message contains three documents from that meeting: 1. SC22 Resolutions Of particular interest to WG5 are resolutions AB Primary Development Body for Fortran AC Russian Translation BB1 Adoption of Procedures for Defects and Interpretations BB2 Instructions for WGs using National Body Development BC & BD Cross Language Matters Other resolutions of interest are A and J 2. Procedures for Handling Defects, including Interpretations It looks like S20 with the addition of a few date fields is an appropriate Defect Log. However, when it comes time for processing, Defect Items with edits are handled one way (Technical Corrigendum) and those without another (Record of responses). Apparently, we could put explanatory edits into Annex C and put all items in a TC. 3. TOR for Cross Language Coordination Ad Hoc Group By February I will have to answer a lot of questions on your behalf. I'd appreciate any help on this. ____________________________________________________________________________ From SC22-request@dkuug.dk Sun Aug 30 04:42:44 1992 Received: from pierce.llnl.gov by ocfmail.ocf.llnl.gov (4.1/SMI-4.0) id AA06891; Sun, 30 Aug 92 04:42:40 PDT Errors-To: SC22-request@dkuug.dk Received: by pierce.llnl.gov (4.1/LLNL-1.18/llnl.gov-05.92) id AA17999; Sun, 30 Aug 92 04:42:42 PDT Return-Path: Received: from dkuug.dk by pierce.llnl.gov (4.1/LLNL-1.18/llnl.gov-05.92) id AA17992; Sun, 30 Aug 92 04:42:34 PDT Received: by dkuug.dk (5.64+/8+bit/IDA-1.2.8) id AA25182; Sun, 30 Aug 92 13:37:00 +0200 Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 13:36:48 +0200 From: Keld J|rn Simonsen X-Sequence: SC22@dkuug.dk 131 Errors-To: SC22-request@dkuug.dk Message-Id: <9208301136.AA25170@dkuug.dk> To: sc22@dkuug.dk Subject: (SC22.131) Resolutions from SC22 plenary in Ellivuori, Finland Aug 92 X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 Status: R Resolutions Prepared at the Fifth Plenary Meeting SC22 Tampere (Ellivuori), Finland, August 24-28, 1992 Final version, adapted for email by Keld Simonsen Resolution A: Revised JTC1 Directives ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 notes the approval of a revision to the JTC1 Directives (document SC22/N1130) and instructs its working group conveners to operate in accordance with these Directives. In particular, attention is called to the following provisions: - working group participants must be authorized by their National Body or liaison organization (1.5.2); - work must be progressed in a timely manner (2.1.3.10, 2.1.3.11); - an annex on portability considerations must, when applicable, be incorporated in standards (6.5.1.7); - the CD ballot period may be extended (6.5.2.1); - CD ballot resolution must occur within 3 months (6.5.2.5); - standards must be periodically reviewed (6.11); - meeting notices and agendas must be distributed preferably four months, but no later than three months in advance (3.5.4.2). Resolution B: Revised Version of the ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 Programme of Work ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 approves the the SC22 Programme of Work specified in document SC22/N1212, with any editorial changes or corrections provided to the SC22 secretariat by working group conveners. Resolution C: Confirmation of ISO/IEC Standards and Technical Report ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 instructs the SC22 Secretariat to inform JTC1 that SC22 recommends that the following ISO/IEC standards and technical report be confirmed: - ISO/IEC 8652:1987 Programming Language Ada - ISO/IEC 6160:1987 Programming Language PL/I - ISO/IEC TR9547:1988 Test Methods for Programming Language Processors Resolution D: Appointment of Project Editors ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 appoints the following project editors: - Mr William Klein (USA) for project JTC1.22.01.04: Correction amendment to ISO 1989:1985 COBOL (WG4); - Mr Don Nelson (USA) for project JTC1.22.01.07: Revision of ISO 1989:1985 COBOL (WG4); - Mr David Emery (USA) for project JTC1.22.26: Uniformity of Ada Implementations (WG9); - Mr Marc Graham (USA) for project JTC1.22.31: Ada/SQL Interface (WG9); - Mr Dominique Chandesris (France) for project JTC1.22.35: Ada Extensions and User Run Time Executive Interface (WG9); - Mr Don Nelson (USA) for project JTC1.22.14: Binding techniques for programming languages (WG11); - Ms Mary Payne (USA) for project JTC1.22.28: Language Independent Arithmetic, Part 1 (WG11); - Mr Klaus Daessler (Germany) for project JTC1.22.22.02: Prolog: Part 2, Modules (WG17). Resolution E: Annual Review of Status of SC22 Resolutions ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 instructs the SC22 Secretariat to add to the agenda of each SC22 Plenary meeting an item for the review of the status of those resolutions from the previous SC22 Plenary meeting for which actions are still outstanding. Resolution F: Working Group Meetings ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 - notes the importance of the following working group meetings to the progress of the work, and that those likely to attend have had adequate notice of them; and hence - approves the convening of these meetings even though three months notice has not been given to SC22: WG11 - Bindings, Paris, 12-16 October 1992 WG13 - Modula-2, Delft, 21-25 September 1992 WG16 - Lisp, Boston, 9-11 October 1992 WG17 - Prolog, Copenhagen, 26-30 October 1992 WG20 - Internationalization, Quebec, 19-23 October 1992 WG21 - C++, Boston, 1-6 November 1992 Resolution G: Termination of Liaison with ISO/IEC JTC1/SC14 ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 - notes the report from its liaison officer to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC14 in document SC22/N1093; - in accordance with the recommendation contained therein, instructs its secretariat to inform the secretariat of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC14 that ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 believes that formal liaison between the two subcommittees is not necessary, and to terminate the liaison; - thanks Mr Klaus Appel for his services as SC22 liaison officer to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC14. Resolution H: Liaison with ISO/IEC JTC1/WG3 ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 - notes that ISO/IEC JTC1/SWG-EDI has been disbanded and hence there is no further need for liaison with that group; - thanks Mr Klaus Appel for his services as SC22 liaison officer to ISO/IEC JTC1/SWG-EDI; - accepts Mr Appel's advice that there is no need at this time for liaison between SC22 and JTC1/WG3 - Open EDI. Resolution I: SC21 Liaison Statement ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 approves document SC22/N1238 as a liaison statement to JTC1/SC21, and instructs the SC22 Secretariat to forward it to JTC1/SC21. Resolution J: Encouragement of User Participation ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 - believes that input from users related to user requirements and priorities is of particular value at the project level; - hence encourages the participation of users, preferably through national bodies, in the work of SC22, particularly in developing user requirements for SC22 standards; and - invites user groups that span more than one country to seek category C liaison with SC22 working groups in accordance with the JTC1 directives. Resolution K1: Resolution of ballot comments on ISO/IEC DIS 11756 - MUMPS* ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 - notes the ballot comments on ISO/IEC DIS 11756 - MUMPS contained in document SC22/N1182; and - approves as resolution of these comments the responses contained in document SC22/N1234. *Note: MUMPS is a trademark of Massachusetts General Hospital Resolution K2: Revision of MUMPS* standard ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 invites the US national body to submit the revision of ISO/IEC 11756 - MUMPS to JTC1 for fast-track processing when it becomes available. *Note: MUMPS is a trademark of Massachusetts General Hospital Resolution L: Liaison statements and reports ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 instructs its liaison representatives to circulate proposed liaison statements and reports to SC22 for comment, within three months, prior to sending them to the liaison organization. Resolution M: New work item proposal on Pascal and extended Pascal bindings to language independent arithmetic ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 instructs the SC22 Secretariat to forward the new work item proposal (NP) in document SC22/N1172, with the title changed to Pascal and extended Pascal bindings to language independent arithmetic, to JTC1 for NP processing. Resolution N: Reports on experience of language bindings ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 requests WG2 and WG13 to submit reports of their experiences of preparing language bindings to Language Independent Arithmetic Part 1. Resolution O: New work item proposal on Z specification language ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 - instructs the SC22 Secretariat to forward the new work item proposal (NP) in document SC22/N1179R, with revised target dates and with the title changed to Z specification language, to JTC1 for NP processing; - requests the UK national body meanwhile to produce additional information about the Z specification language and its relationship with VDM-SL, if possible in time to help JTC1 national bodies in determining their vote; - if the NP is approved by JTC1, authorizes the establishment of a new SC22 working group, and invites the UK national body to consider providing the convener and secretariat for this group. Resolution P: New work item proposal for Technical Report on object-oriented extensions to Pascal ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 - instructs WG2 to revise its new work item proposal (NP) for Technical Report on object-oriented extensions to Pascal (document SC22/N1203) taking into account comments made on the title, type of technical report and target dates, and to forward the revised NP to the SC22 secretariat; - instructs the SC22 secretariat then to forward the revised NP to JTC1 for NP processing. Resolution Q: Forth ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 - requests the US member body to provide the most recent version of the proposed Forth standard to the SC22 secretariat for circulation to SC22; - instructs the SC22 secretariat to conduct a consultative letter ballot on the suitability of this standard for fast track processing. Resolution AA: Category C liaison with X/Open for WG4 ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22, noting the report of the WG4 convener that Category C liaison with the X/Open COBOL working group would be beneficial to the work of SC22, authorizes the provisional participation of that group in the work of WG4, whilst the formal processes for establishing liaison are proceeding. Resolution AB: Primary Development Body for the International Fortran Standard ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 - notes that project JTC1 22.02.01, revision of ISO 1539:1980 (Fortran), was completed with the publication of ISO 1539:1991; - authorises WG5 - Fortran to begin work on the next revision of the standard; - notes and approves WG5's recommendation, expressed in resolution V9 in document SC22/N1214, that the work of revision be progressed by the US technical subcommittee X3J3 acting as primary development body for the next revision of ISO/IEC 1539:1991, provided that the X3 I-project rules are used for the project, and that such a project be established by June 30, 1993; - requests the USA National body to take the necessary steps to arrange for this to be done. Resolution AC: Russian Language Version of ISO/IEC 1539:1991 (Fortran) ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 - requests the SC22 Secretariat to consult with the Russian National body about the desirability of ISO/IEC publishing the existing Russian translation of ISO/IEC 1539:1991 (Fortran); - instructs the SC22 Secretariat, if the Russian National Body concurs, to request ITTF to publish this Russian translation expeditiously and at minimal cost. Resolution AD: Language Independent Specification Methods (withdrawn) Resolution AE: CD Registration of Technical Report on test methods for measuring conformity to POSIX ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 approves the CD registration of document SC22/N1180, and instructs the SC22 secretariat to initiate the CD balloting as soon as the WG15 conformance testing rapporteur group has provided a proposed resolution of the UK NP comments in document SC22/N1134 for inclusion in the balloting package. Resolution AF: DIS Registration of CD 9945-2 POSIX: Shell and Utilities, incorporating the User Portability Extension amendment ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 - notes that the balloting positions of France, Denmark and New Zealand with respect to the amendment are affirmative; - notes that the comments raised by Japan have been sufficiently addressed and that the Japanese ballot is also now affirmative; - concludes that there is now substantial support of the P- members of SC22 for DIS registration of CD 9945-2 as proposed; and therefore - approves the DIS registration of CD 9945-2, incorporating the changes shown in documents SC22/N1147 and SC22/N1148, merging the User Portability Extension with the main document. Resolution AG: Revised Schedule for Lisp (WG16) ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22, noting the substantial progress made by WG16 - Lisp, extends the deadline for progressing their work beyond stage 2 to 31 December 1992. Resolution AH: Approval of CD Registration for Prolog Part 1, General Core ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 - notes the ballot results in document SC22/N1205 on CD registration of the document SC22/N1133 - Prolog Part 1, General Core, and the late ballots in document SC22/N1210; and - approves registration of the CD for Prolog Part 1, General Core. Resolution AI: Subdivision of FIMS Work Item ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 endorses the subdivision of project JTC1.22.27, FIMS, in accordance with the descriptions in document SC22/N1154, as follows: JTC1.22.27.01 Forms Interface Management System (FIMS) JTC1.22.27.02 Addendum to FIMS - COBOL binding JTC1.22.27.03 Addendum to FIMS - Intermediate subset JTC1.22.27.04 Addendum to FIMS - Fortran binding JTC1.22.27.05 Addendum to FIMS - Ada binding. Resolution AJ: New Work Item Proposal for FIMS ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 - instructs the convener of WG18 to prepare a New Work Item Proposal (NP) to develop FIMS device profiles that match OSI Virtual Terminal profiles, the NP to be based on document SC22/N1154 and to emphasize the liaison requirements to SC21; - instructs the SC22 secretariat to submit this NP to JTC1 for balloting, with the recommendation that it be assigned to SC22 should it be approved. Resolution AK: Subdivision of Work Item JTC1.22.29 - Vienna Development Method - Specification Language ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 - notes that WG19 is close to completing its work on the main language features to be defined in standard VDM-SL but that more work is required in defining a facility for modules; - endorses the subdivision of the work item JTC1.22.29 - Vienna Development Method - Specification Language (VDM-SL) as follows: JTC1.22.29.01 - VDM-SL: Part 1, Base Language JTC1.22.29.02 - VDM-SL: Part 2, Modules. Resolution AL: Category C liaison with X/Open for WG20 ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22, noting the report of the WG20 convener that Category C liaison with the X/Open Internationalization working group would be beneficial to the work of SC22, authorizes the provisional participation of that group in the work of WG20, whilst the formal processes for establishing liaison are proceeding. Resolution AM: Subdivision of Work Item JTC1.22.30 - Functionality for the internationalization of applications ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 endorses the subdivision of the work item JTC1.22.30 - Functionality for the internationalization of applications as follows: JTC1.22.30.01 - Framework for internationalization for programming languages and their environments JTC1.22.30.02 - Functionality for the internationalization of applications Resolution AN: Assignment of work item JTC1.22.13 - Guidelines for the preparation of programming language standards ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 assigns to WG20 work item JTC1.22.13 for the purpose of producing a revised version of TR 10176:1991 - Guidelines for the preparation of programming language standards, the extent of the revision being confined to internationalization issues. Resolution BA: Unique Identifier for Defect Reports (withdrawn) Resolution BB1: Adoption of procedures for handling of Defect Reports ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 adopts document SC22/N1236 as its procedures for handling reports of defects or suspected defects in, and requests for interpretation concerning, documents for which it is responsible, in accordance with clause 6.13.3 of the JTC1 Directives. Resolution BB2: Instructions for working groups using national body development ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 instructs those working groups which use national body development to revise their synchronization plans to be in accordance with the procedures specified in document SC22/N1236. Resolution BC: Ad Hoc Group on cross-language coordination ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22, recognizing the need for a subcommittee policy on cross-language coordination, establishes a Cross-Language Coordination Ad Hoc Group, under the leadership of Mr Paul Rabin, and with the terms of reference specified in the document SC22/N1235: - to draw up a Cross-Language Coordination Questionnaire to identify expected interactions between individual languages and cross-language standards, based on the draft in SC22/N1186, and to distribute it, by 30 September 1992, to all SC22 WG conveners; - to make the responses to the Questionnaire available to the SC22 National Bodies as soon as possible in order that the results can be useful during ballots that occur before the 1993 SC22 plenary meeting; - to develop a proposed policy for cross-language standard coordination; - to identify the actions necessary to implement the proposed policy for each SC22 language; and - to produce a report on its work and forward it to the SC22 secretariat by 31 May 1993 for distribution and for discussion at the 1993 SC22 plenary. The membership of the Cross-Language Coordination Ad Hoc Group will include Ed Barkmeyer (USA), Ken Edwards (USA), Brian Meek (UK) and Willem Wakker (NL). The Ad Hoc Group is intended to work by e-mail and correspondence. Resolution BD: Cross-Language Coordination: Questionnaire ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 - instructs working group conveners to send completed responses to the Cross-Language Coordination Questionnaire in machine readable form to the address specified on the questionnaire, by 28 February 1993; and - confirms that any responses will be treated as informative and not agreed WG policy, and that conveners are free to use whatever practical means they deem appropriate to complete the responses by the specified deadline. Resolution BE: Cross-Language Coordination: external liaisons ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 instructs its Ad Hoc Group to send the following information to bodies outside SC22: - an explanation of what SC22 is trying to accomplish by this exercise and how participation in it of their body can improve the work of both bodies; - a request for any input they are able to provide which would assist the Ad Hoc Group in its work, including their responses to the relevant parts of the Cross-Language Coordination Questionnaire where appropriate, with the aim of advancing the cause of obtaining mutually satisfactory and useful standards; - copies of the Cross-Language Coordination Questionnaire; and - copies of the relevant CDs, as appropriate; the bodies concerned being: SC2; SC7; SC18; SC21, with the response to their liaison request on APIs; SC21/WG3, for SQL and IRDS; SC24; ECMA, for PCTE ANSI ASC X11, for MUMPS* *Note: MUMPS is a trademark of Massachusetts General Hospital Resolution BF: Ad Hoc Meeting on Character Sets ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 - recognizes a need for the technical experts in its working groups to develop an understanding of IS 10646:1992, and related character set standards; - recognizes that a better understanding of the concepts of character and glyph would be of value to SC22; therefore - resolves that an ad hoc meeting on character sets will be arranged, with Mr Keith Hopper (NZ) as convener, the agenda to include the issues identified in SC22/N1239, with expert participation invited from SC2, SC18 and all working groups in SC22, to help SC22 WG experts to understand the content and implications of these standards related to the work of SC22. Resolution BG: Internationalization Report to JTC1 ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 - approves document SC22/N1237 as the basis of its response to Resolution 18j of the October 1991 JTC1 Plenary meeting; - recognizes that additional facts regarding current activities may be added to the document and that general editorial corrections may be made to improve the document's clarity and consistency; - authorizes its Chairman, or his designee, to carry out such changes and submit the revised response to JTC1. Resolution XA: Appreciation to M. Francois Genuys ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 expresses its warmest thanks and appreciation to M. Francois Genuys for his many years of service to SC22 and to SC5 (SC22's predecessor subcommittee) and for all that he has done to further the development and standardization of programming languages. SC22 extends to him its best wishes for a long and enjoyable retirement. Resolution XB: Appreciation to M. Jean Bourgain ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 expresses its warmest thanks and appreciation to M. Jean Bourgain for his many years of service to SC22 and to SC5 (SC22's predecessor subcommittee) and working groups of those subcommittees, in particular to WG4 - COBOL. SC22 extends to him its best wishes for a long and enjoyable retirement. Resolution XX: Appreciation ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 expresses its appreciation to all those who have assisted in the work of this meeting, and in particular, - to the companies and institutions that sponsored the meeting, namely Canon (Pori), the Information Technology Development Centre TIEKE, the Finnish Standards Association SFS, the Finnish Information Processing Association, the Ministry of Trade and Industry, and Tampere University of Technology; - to Ms Ulla Kokkonen and Ms Marja-Terttu Mustonen, for their secretarial services, and Mr Tapio Saari for photocopying; - to Mr John Dawes for his informative presentation on PCTE and ECMA's plans for its ISO standardization; - to Mr Bob Follett (Chairman) and Mr Joe Cote (Secretariat), and to Mr Roger Scowen for chairing the final session at short notice; - to the ad hoc meeting conveners, namely Mr John Hill (Interpretations), Mr Paul Nash (Character Set Issues), Mr Willem Wakker (Cross Language Issues), and Mr Andrew Walker (Internationalization); - to the drafting committee members, namely Mr Claude Bourstin, Mr Scott Jameson, Mr Keld Simonsen, Mr Graham Warren, and especially Mr Brian Meek for his editing services; - and above all to Prof Hannu Jaakkola, for the many services he performed in organizing and running the meeting, and especially for arranging for the comprehensive range of services to be available, for introducing delegates to the mysteries of the Finnish sauna, and for acting as so generous a host. (All resolutions were passed unanimously with the exception of Resolution P on which Japan and New Zealand abstained.) ____________________________________________________________________________ From SC22-request@dkuug.dk Sun Aug 30 04:49:10 1992 Received: from pierce.llnl.gov by ocfmail.ocf.llnl.gov (4.1/SMI-4.0) id AA06900; Sun, 30 Aug 92 04:49:08 PDT Errors-To: SC22-request@dkuug.dk Received: by pierce.llnl.gov (4.1/LLNL-1.18/llnl.gov-05.92) id AA18019; Sun, 30 Aug 92 04:49:10 PDT Return-Path: Received: from dkuug.dk by pierce.llnl.gov (4.1/LLNL-1.18/llnl.gov-05.92) id AA18012; Sun, 30 Aug 92 04:49:04 PDT Received: by dkuug.dk (5.64+/8+bit/IDA-1.2.8) id AA25389; Sun, 30 Aug 92 13:45:27 +0200 Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 13:45:20 +0200 From: Keld J|rn Simonsen X-Sequence: SC22@dkuug.dk 133 Errors-To: SC22-request@dkuug.dk Message-Id: <9208301145.AA25378@dkuug.dk> To: sc22@dkuug.dk Subject: (SC22.133) N1236: Procedures for handling of Defect Reports in SC22 X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 Status: R ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 N1236 Title: Procedures for handling of Defect Reports in SC22 Date: 1992-08-28 Status: Approved by SC22 plenary in Ellivuori, Finland 1 Introduction 1.1 Purpose The purpose of this document is to set forth the procedures by which Defect Reports, including requests for interpretations, are handled by ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 (SC22). 1.2 Scope These procedures conform to and amplify the requirements and definitions specified in the ISO/IEC JTC1 Directives (6.13). They span the full range of documents originated by SC22, including standards and technical reports, The procedures cover all aspects of SC22 processing including: a) flow of documents b) development and approval c) publication d) synchronization with member body activity 1.3 Guiding Principles Several principles have given rise to these procedures. They have been derived from comments made to documents distributed within SC22 and from the JTC1 Directives. These principles are: a) Identification - All requests for interpretation identify some lack of clarity in the document, and as such these can be viewed as one form of Defect Report, and can be addressed under the defect resolution procedures in accordance with the JTC1 Directives and this document. b) Technical Content - The SC22 working group (SC22/WG) that is responsible for the document for which a Defect Report has been received is responsible for the development of the response. c) Responsiveness - The process should be sufficiently rapid as to allow as little time as possible to pass between the time of receipt of a Defect Report and the time the requestor receives an interim response. d) Visibility - The procedures should provide for appropriate visibility of the response to the reported defect among all users of the document. e) Stability - Substantive changes should be made to a document only when demonstrably necessary to correct a significant defect. Frequent or gratuitous changes may complicate compliance and synchronization with other documents. f) Limitation of Scope - These procedures do not grant SC22/WGs license to make substantial alterations to the functionality described by a document. 2 Submitter Procedures This section identifies sources for Defect Requests, and the actions to be taken by the submitter. 2.1 Sources of Requests Defect Reports may be submitted only by: a) a National Body of ISO or IEC b) an SC22/WG c) the project editor for the document d) an organization in liaison with ISO/IEC 2.2 Submission Procedures The submitter of a Defect Report shall prepare and submit ISO/IEC Form 14 (see attachment 1) in accordance with the instructions on the form. 3 Processing This section details the processing of a Defect Report, and assigns specific responsibilities to SC22/WGs and to SC22. The SC22 working group (SC22/WG) that is responsible for the document for which a Defect Report has been received is responsible for the development of the response. 3.1 Overview The responsible SC22/WG shall develop the response to a Defect Report. It shall maintain a log of all Defect Reports and their responses. The response to the Defect Report shall result in a contribution either to a Technical Corrigendum (TC) or to a Record of Response. a) Handling Requests Without a Responsible WG Where no SC22/WG exists with responsibility for a document that is the subject of a Defect Report, SC22 shall establish an ad hoc group to act as a WG for the purpose of developing a response. This group shall perform all of the actions required by a SC22/WG according to these procedures. Results shall be recorded by the SC22 Secretariat which shall maintain a Defect Report Log for each document for that purpose. 3.2 SC22/WG Actions The SC22/WG Convener is responsible for ensuring that all SC22/WG actions specified by these procedures are performed by the SC22/WG. a) Tracking Each SC22/WG shall maintain a log of Defect Reports for each of its documents as required by the JTC1 Directives (6.13.3.7). Each entry in this log shall include: i) the unique Defect Report number assigned by the SC22/WG, ii) full identification of document numbers (including CCITT referencs in joint projects) iii) status of the Defect Report, iv) date when submittal occured, v) date when response is required, vi) date when ballot terminates, vii) date of publication of response to the Defect Report. The interim response to the submitter, and all other correspondence on this Defect Report, shall include the unique Defect Report number. Maintaining the following additional information may prove useful to the SC22/WGs: i) description of reported defect ii) response iii) references within the document, and references to other relevant documents iv) classification (per internal SC22/WG classification scheme) The Convener shall submit the up-to-date Defect Report index to the SC22 Secretariat immediately before each SC22 meeting. b) Developing The responsible SC22/WG shall develop a response to the Defect Report, in accordance with these procedures. Once the SC22/WG has approved the response to the Defect Report, the SC22/WG shall forward an interim response to the submitter. This response should refer to the original submitter's correspondence, include the SC22/WG identification number, and the response to the Defect Report. This response should also make clear that this is an interim response, and a final response must be approved by SC22. c) Publishing For each document, the responsible SC22/WG shall construct responses to Defect Reports as follows: i) Responses requiring normative changes to a document shall specify the textual amendments to be applied. ii) Responses not requiring normative changes may specify textual amendments to an informative annex. Responses requiring textual amendments, as deemed necessary by the responsible SC22/WG, shall be incorporated into a Technical Corrigendum, for publication by SC22. Where the response to a Defect Report is not incorporated into a TC, it shall be incorporated into a Record of Response, for publication by SC22. d) Batching A Technical Corrigendum or a Record of Reponse may include responses to several Defect Reports. The content and timing of publication is the responsibility of the SC22/WG. Any batching shall take into account the number and significance of the responses and the SC22/WG's plans for revision of the document. e) Distribution Once the resolution has been approved by SC22, the SC22/WG shall send to the submitter of each Defect Report, under cover of a final reply letter, a copy of the approved response to that Defect Report. 3.3 SC22 Actions The SC22/WG shall forward draft Technical Corrigenda to the SC22 Secretariat, requesting a letter ballot by SC22 and simultaneous distribution to JTC1 for review and comment on the draft Technical Corrigenda by those P- Members of JTC1 that are not P-members of SC22. The SC22/WG shall forward draft Records of Response to the SC22 secretariat, requesting a default letter ballot with a seventy-five day response time. Distribution of the TC or Records of Response shall be accomplished by the SC22 Secretariat consistent with ISO/IEC JTC1 Directives and SC22 procedures. 4 Synchronization This section ensures that Defect Report resolutions to SC22 Standards and Technical Reports are handled the same in the national bodies. This is of particular importance for those SC22 documents that were developed by SC22 member bodies. 4.1 Member Body Development For those SC22/WGs that use national body development, the SC22/WG shall recommend to SC22 those changes to its synchronization plan which accommodate the handling of Defect Reports. SC22 shall review and approve those changes. The same changes are required to be approved by the appropriate National Body organization. ____________________________________________________________________________ From SC22-request@dkuug.dk Sun Aug 30 04:44:29 1992 Received: from pierce.llnl.gov by ocfmail.ocf.llnl.gov (4.1/SMI-4.0) id AA06896; Sun, 30 Aug 92 04:44:27 PDT Errors-To: SC22-request@dkuug.dk Received: by pierce.llnl.gov (4.1/LLNL-1.18/llnl.gov-05.92) id AA18009; Sun, 30 Aug 92 04:44:29 PDT Return-Path: Received: from dkuug.dk by pierce.llnl.gov (4.1/LLNL-1.18/llnl.gov-05.92) id AA18002; Sun, 30 Aug 92 04:44:23 PDT Received: by dkuug.dk (5.64+/8+bit/IDA-1.2.8) id AA25277; Sun, 30 Aug 92 13:40:49 +0200 Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 13:40:42 +0200 From: Keld J|rn Simonsen X-Sequence: SC22@dkuug.dk 132 Errors-To: SC22-request@dkuug.dk Message-Id: <9208301140.AA25266@dkuug.dk> To: sc22@dkuug.dk Subject: (SC22.132) N1235: ToR for SC22 Ad Hoc on Cross Language Coordination X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 Status: R ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 N1235 Title: Terms of Reference of the SC22 Ad Hoc Group on Cross Language Coordination Date: 1992-08-28 Status: Adopted by SC22 plenary in Ellevuori, Finland 1. The Ad Hoc Group on Cross Language Coordination (XLCG) shall develop a draft Policy for the Application of Cross Language Standards within SC22. 2. The policy shall cover all SC22 cross-language standards, binding standards, and programming language standards, both approved and under development. 3. The policy shall have the objective of ensuring that all SC22 cross-language standards are appropriately addressed by all SC22 programming language standards, and that cross- language standards projects are undertaken with this requirement in mind. (In particular, National Bodies should consider the impact on language-development resources before agreeing to cross-language projects, and the scopes of cross-language projects should be carefully set.) 4. The policy shall address at least the following issues: a. how it is determined which standards are considered to be cross-language standards and which standards are considered to be programming language standards for the purpose of the policy (it is noted that a standard may be both a programming language standard and an cross-language standard); b. the appropriate categorization of cross-language standards and the different policies that apply to each category; c. how it is determined whether and when a binding between an cross-language standard and a programming language standard should be created; d. how the appropriate binding method for each binding from a programming language standard to a cross- language standard should be determined; e. how it is determined which working group should define the binding, and how consistency of the binding with the intents of the cross-language and programming language working groups shall be assured; f. what kinds of conformance requirements are appropriate for cross-language standards; g. how the relative priority of programming language projects, cross-language projects and binding projects should be determined; h. what SC22 involvement in management of inter-related projects should be. 5. Since the policy will not be complete before the 1993 SC22 Plenary and several projects' documents may well reach DIS by then, the following action should be taken immediately following the 1992 JTC1/SC22 plenary meeting: a. XLCG shall distribute to all SC22 working group convenors the Cross-Language Coordination Questionnaire included in this document as Attachment 2. Part 1 is to be completed for all SC22 programming language standards. Part 2 is to be completed for all SC22 cross language standards. Both parts should be completed for standards that are both programming language standards and cross-language standards. b. Responses to the questionnaire should be completed by the SC22 working group conveners and returned to the XLCG convener by the date requested. (One effective approach would be for the programming language working groups, together with cross-language working groups, to create enough of a binding to demonstrate the use, implications and feasibility of the relevant cross- language standard.) c. For the purpose of the questionnaire the following standards shall be considered to be programming language standards: Pascal Extended Pascal APL COBOL Fortran BASIC Ada Modula-2 C LISP Prolog FIMS VDM C++ M For the purpose of the questionnaire the following standards shall be considered to be cross-language standards: CLIP CLID LIA POSIX LIS FIMS VDM Internationalization d. XLCG shall make the questionnaire responses available to the SC22 National Bodies as soon as possible, in order that the results can be useful during ballots that occur before the 1993 SC22 plenary meeting. 6. The XLCG shall contact groups outside SC22 in order to inform them of the activity of the XLCG, and to solicit information about their projects that can be useful for the development of the policy. Attachment 1: Summary of Binding Methods Binding methods (methods a to e are described in TR 10182) a. Revision or extension to the language syntax in order to support the cross-language facility (as by the programming language compiler or interpreter). b. Embedding "alien" syntax in the program text to support the cross-language facility (as by a preprocessor). c. Use of definition (as by another extension facility) provided by the programming language standard to support the cross-language facility (as by a standard header file). d. Addition of library functions or procedures to support the cross-language facility using mechanisms provided by the programming language standard. e. Support of the cross-language facility by mapping to the structures and services of the language environment (as by support of file structures or data types). f. Direct normative reference from the language standard to the cross-language facility standard. g. Direct inclusion of (part of) the text of the cross- language facility standard in the language standard. Attachment 2: Cross-Language Coordination Questionnaire Part 1: Questionnaire for Programming Language Standard Projects The following questions are to be addressed for each programming language standard by the responsible working group. 1) Identify the programming language standard by project number and title. 2) What facilities are defined by the programming language standard to support bindings to cross-language standards? Which binding mechanisms are supported by each such facility? 3) How do conformance requirements of the language standard affect bindings from this programming language standard to cross-language standards? 4) Are there guidelines available for the development of bindings into this programming language? 5) Are you indicating ``Future Directions'' in your project, such as reserving name space, etc., for future revisions of your standard so that working groups developing cross- language or binding standards will know what to avoid? 6) Are there technical areas, relevant to your standard, for which new cross-language standards (within the scope of SC22) would be useful? Questions 7 through 18 are to be addressed for each cross language (XL) standard. 7) Identify the cross-language standard being addressed by project number and title (document number?). 8) Is a binding useful between the programming language standard and the cross-language standard? Why? 9) Is a binding feasible between the programming language standard and the cross-language standard? If not, why not? 10) Is work being done in your working group to develop a binding for this programming language standard? If so, what milestone has it reached? What is its expected completion date? 11) What modifications to the cross-language standard are necessary for it to be compatible with your project? 12) What modifications to the cross-language standard would make it a more natural fit for users of your programming language? 13) What modifications would your working group have to make to the programming language standard to accommodate the cross- language standard? Does your working group have the necessary expertise and resources to this work? Is your working group prepared to do the work for these modifications? If so, how long would it take? 14) Are there any parts of the cross-language standard you cannot accommodate at all for technical reasons, or would much prefer to not accommodate for either philosophical or technical reasons? If so, which and why? 15) Which binding methods could be used? Which of these methods is preferred? (see attachment 1, Binding Methods) 16) Which working group do you think should define the binding? If your working group had to do the binding, by when could it be produced? 17) Would it be appropriate to include the binding in your standard? Why? 18) If the binding had to appear in your next revision or addendum, how would that affect your delivery schedule? Part 2: Questionnaire for Cross-Language Standard Projects The following questions are to be addressed for each cross- language standard by the responsible working group. 1) Identify the cross-language standard being addressed by project number and title. 2) What is the purpose of this cross-language standard? 3) What are the conformity requirements of this cross-language standard? 4) Does the value of this cross-language standard depend on its widespread support by programming language standards? 5) Does the value of this cross-language standard depend on a common binding method being used for all programming language bindings? 6) What are the dependencies between this cross-language standard and other cross-language standards? Questions 7 through 17 are to be addressed for each programming language standard. 7) Identify the programming language standards being addressed by project number and title (document number?). 8) Is a binding useful between the cross-language standard and the programming language standard? Why? 9) Is a binding feasible between the cross-language standard and the programming language standard? If not, why not? 10) Is work being done in your working group to develop a binding for this cross-language standard? If so, what milestone(s) has it reached? What is its expected completion date? 11) What modifications to the programming language standard are necessary for it to be compatible with this cross-language standard? 12) What modifications would your working group have to make to the cross-language standard to accommodate the programming language standard? Does your working group have the expertise and the resources to do the work? Is your working group prepared to do the work for these modifications? If so, how long would it take? 13) Are there any parts of the programming language standard you cannot accommodate at all for technical reasons, or would much prefer to not accommodate for either philosophical or technical reasons? If so, which and why? 14) Which binding methods could be used? Which of these methods is preferred? (see attachment 1, Binding Methods) 15) Which working group do you think should define the binding? If your working group had to do the binding, by when could it be produced? 16) Would it be appropriate to include the binding in your standard? Why? 17) If the binding had to appear in your next revision or addendum, how would that affect your delivery schedule?