From owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk  Fri May 23 02:12:34 2003
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) id h4N0CY7l036609
	for sc22wg5-domo; Fri, 23 May 2003 02:12:34 +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 smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.62])
	by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) with ESMTP id h4N0CKEc036604
	for <sc22wg5@dkuug.dk>; Fri, 23 May 2003 02:12:30 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from dnagle@erols.com)
Received: from 66-44-59-108.s362.tnt3.lnhva.md.dialup.rcn.com ([66.44.59.108])
	by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #4)
	id 19J0BX-0003PE-00
	for sc22wg5@dkuug.dk; Thu, 22 May 2003 20:13:24 -0400
From: Dan Nagle <dnagle@erols.com>
To: sc22wg5@dkuug.dk
Subject: Re: (SC22WG5.2729) Name of the language
Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 20:17:49 -0400
Organization: Purple Sage Computing Solutions, Inc.
Message-ID: <40qqcv88btsjbb0oh6ap9rsjd7fsfks0k9@4ax.com>
References: <200305022236.h42MaukZ085984@dkuug.dk> <200305221604.h4MG48S1032762@dkuug.dk>
In-Reply-To: <200305221604.h4MG48S1032762@dkuug.dk>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by dkuug.dk id h4N0CWEc036605
Sender: owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk
Precedence: bulk

Hello,

I prefer Fortran 2000, folks on WG5 and J3 have known for years
that it wouldn't be released in 2000, but the name is now
well propagated.  It's too late to stop now.  :-)

-- 
Cheers!

Dan Nagle
Purple Sage Computing Solutions, Inc.

On Thu, 22 May 2003 17:06:45 +0100, John Reid <j.k.reid@rl.ac.uk>
wrote:

>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.