From owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk  Thu May 22 20:35:30 2003
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) id h4MIZU2U034129
	for sc22wg5-domo; Thu, 22 May 2003 20:35:30 +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 rap.rap.dk (213.237.47.228.adsl.vbr.worldonline.dk [213.237.47.228])
	by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) with ESMTP id h4MIZMEc034124
	for <sc22wg5@dkuug.dk>; Thu, 22 May 2003 20:35:26 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from keld@rap.rap.dk)
Received: by rap.rap.dk (Postfix, from userid 500)
	id 5364C3EC4E; Thu, 22 May 2003 20:36:21 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from nwkea-mail-1.sun.com (nwkea-mail-1.sun.com [192.18.42.13])
	by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) with ESMTP id h4MH3rEc033350
	for <sc22wg5@dkuug.dk>; Thu, 22 May 2003 19:04:04 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from michaeli@ranma.eng.sun.com)
Received: from engmail2sun.Eng.Sun.COM ([129.144.134.19])
	by nwkea-mail-1.sun.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h4MH4o4Z008133;
	Thu, 22 May 2003 10:04:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ranma.eng.sun.com (ranma.Eng.Sun.COM [129.146.78.89])
	by engmail2sun.Eng.Sun.COM (8.12.9+Sun/8.12.9/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id h4MH4ouc025997;
	Thu, 22 May 2003 10:04:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from michaeli@localhost)
	by ranma.eng.sun.com (8.11.7+Sun/8.11.7) id h4MH4n602171;
	Thu, 22 May 2003 10:04:49 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 10:04:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: Michael Ingrassia <michaeli@ranma.eng.sun.com>
Message-Id: <200305221704.h4MH4n602171@ranma.eng.sun.com>
To: sc22wg5@dkuug.dk, Richard.Maine@nasa.gov
Subject: Re: (SC22WG5.2730) Name of the language
X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII
Sender: owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk
Precedence: bulk

>forever having to explain to
>   people that all the stuff they read about Fortran 2000 really
>   applies to Fortran 2003.

Forgive me, Richard, but I can't resist countering that
half the stuff people read about Fortran 2000 really *doesn't* apply to
Fortran 2003.

Which I suppose is just another way of stating John's point that
the technical content really is different now than it was in 2000. 

	--Michael I.