From owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk  Thu May 22 18:04:07 2003
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) id h4MG47e5032751
	for sc22wg5-domo; Thu, 22 May 2003 18:04:07 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk)
X-Authentication-Warning: ptah.dkuug.dk: majordom set sender to owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk using -f
Received: from inf.rl.ac.uk (nfs7.inf.rl.ac.uk [130.246.72.7])
	by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) with ESMTP id h4MG3wEc032746
	for <sc22wg5@dkuug.dk>; Thu, 22 May 2003 18:04:03 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from j.k.reid@rl.ac.uk)
Received: from numerical.cc.rl.ac.uk (numerical [130.246.8.23])
	by inf.rl.ac.uk (8.11.6+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id h4MG3Qq00559
	for <sc22wg5@dkuug.dk>; Thu, 22 May 2003 17:03:26 +0100 (BST)
Received: from rl.ac.uk (jkr.cse.rl.ac.uk [130.246.9.202])
	by numerical.cc.rl.ac.uk (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA23101
	for <sc22wg5@dkuug.dk>; Thu, 22 May 2003 17:13:36 +0100 (BST)
Message-ID: <3ECCF595.1000608@rl.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 17:06:45 +0100
From: John Reid <j.k.reid@rl.ac.uk>
Reply-To: j.k.reid@rl.ac.uk
Organization: Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: sc22wg5@dkuug.dk
Subject: Name of the language
References: <200305022236.h42MaukZ085984@dkuug.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk
Precedence: bulk

Dear all,

We have been using the name Fortran 2000 since the meeting in Oulu 
(2000) when the following straw vote was taken (see N1418):

Should the name be:

     Fortran 2000    9
     Fortran 200x    2
     Undecided       4

This was in the context of what name to use in the resolutions. The 
decision itself did not make it into a resolution.

Since then, I have been determined as Convener to avoid discussing the 
name since such a discussion can be a big time waster. But now that
(hopefully) the technical content is chosen, I would like to switch the 
name to Fortran 2003. My reasons are

1. It corresponds to past practice of basing the name on the year in 
which the technical content is chosen.

2. It will allow for a minor revision to Fortran 2008, or whatever.

3. Fortran 2000 as a name sounds dated.

Comments, please.


Best wishes,

John.