From owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Thu Sep 4 19:45:13 2003 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) id h84HjDoG018251 for sc22wg5-domo; Thu, 4 Sep 2003 19:45:13 +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 mail1.cray.com (mail1.cray.com [136.162.0.111]) by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) with ESMTP id h84Hj3Cp018243 for ; Thu, 4 Sep 2003 19:45:08 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from longb@cray.com) Received: from relayb.mw.cray.com (relayb.us.cray.com [192.168.252.110]) by mail1.cray.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/gw-1.2) with ESMTP id h84Hj34G025362; Thu, 4 Sep 2003 12:45:03 -0500 (CDT) Received: from saffron.us.cray.com (saffron.mw.cray.com [172.31.27.14]) by relayb.mw.cray.com (8.12.9/8.12.6/hub-1.2) with ESMTP id h84Hix2E024158; Thu, 4 Sep 2003 12:44:59 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cray.com (mh-dhcp-172-31-16-160 [172.31.16.160]) by saffron.us.cray.com (8.8.8/Cray-server-1.6-nhsmod011017) with ESMTP id MAA47547; Thu, 4 Sep 2003 12:44:59 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <3F577BFE.6030007@cray.com> Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 12:53:02 -0500 From: Bill Long Reply-To: longb@cray.com Organization: Cray Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Richard Maine CC: sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Subject: Re: (SC22WG5.2967) paragraph numbering References: <200309041659.h84Gx2Yp017775@dkuug.dk> In-Reply-To: <200309041659.h84Gx2Yp017775@dkuug.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Cray-VirusStatus: clean Sender: owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Precedence: bulk Hi Richard, My guess is that people (WG5/J3 members, compiler writers, textbook writers, ...) who care about location granularity finer than subsection numbers will probably use the final 007 "draft", with line numbers, as their permanent working version of the standard. Adding paragraph numbers would be a redundant location scheme that invites notation confusion - what does [132:2] mean? - and provides no benefit. For others, I don't think the paragraph numbers add enough to justify the work involved. Cheers, Bill Richard Maine wrote: >There has been some discussion (partly off-list) about the possibility >of putting paragraph numbers in the FCD (and the published standard). >Apparently we cannot put line numbers in the actual standard, but >paragraph numbers are acceptable. (We knew before that line >numbers were at best questionable, so the 007 is done in a way >that makes it trivial to turn them all off). > >I do classify this as a purely typographical issue, albeit a fairly >large one just because of its global nature. I'd like to get some >feedback from WG5 as a whole on the question of adding paragraph >numbers. We don't appear to have a choice about the line numbers, so >that's not the part I am asking fro feedback about. The question is >whether to add paragraph numbers of have nothing. > > > -- Bill Long longb@cray.com Fortran Technical Support & voice: 651-605-9024 Bioinformatics Software Development fax: 651-605-9142 Cray Inc., 1340 Mendota Heights Rd., Mendota Heights, MN, 55120