From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,2106dd704b99f22c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-09-15 16:54:20 PST Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!sundog.tiac.net!usenet.elf.com!news2.near.net!MathWorks.Com!yeshua.marcam.com!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!sunic!ugle.unit.no!nac.no!nntp-oslo.uninett.no!naggum.no!erik From: Erik Naggum Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: ISO/IEC DIS 8652 and ISO/IEC DIS 14519-1 Date: 15 Sep 1994 05:27:53 UT Organization: Naggum Software; +47 2295 0313 Message-ID: <19940915.5134@naggum.no> NNTP-Posting-Host: naggum.no Date: 1994-09-15T05:27:53+00:00 List-Id: INTRODUCTORY REMARKS as a consultant to the Norwegian Standards Organization on matters of ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 22 (although my "home committee" is SC 18), I receive some funny things in the mail. in this case, it may be very serious. voting on ISO/IEC DIS 8652, ISO-speak for "Ada9X", terminates 1994-10-30, and it is expected that progression to IS will be expeditious. meanwhile, IEEE standard 1003.5-1992 is being fast-tracked as ISO/IEC DIS 14519-1, on which voting began 1994-08-25 and terminates 1995-02-25. IEEE 1003.5 is better known as POSIX.5, its full name being IEEE Standard for Information Technology -- POSIX Ada Language Interfaces -- Part 1: Binding for System Application Program Interface (API) it was approved by the IEEE Standards Board 1992-06-18. the "fast-track procedure" takes an existing standard from some member body or category A liaison and asks ISO to rubber-stamp it by vote from its member bodies. IEEE is such a category A liaison, and IEEE 1003 is generally being fast-tracked into various parts of ISO/IEC 9945, with Ada bindings apparently findings its place as ISO/IEC 14519. 1003.5 is a binding to Ada 83 (ISO 8652:1987). it is not unlikely that the second edition of ISO 8652 (Ada9X) will be published or at least approved for publication before voting on this standard terminates. PROBLEM I am in a difficult position, as I think most other SC 22 members and consultants are, whether I shall recommend to disapprove this DIS on grounds of impending revision of one of its base standard, or to proceed with the rubber-stamping procedure in the hopes that a revised version will eventually come along, and that an Ada 83 binding is more important than no binding. that this is an IEEE standard already diminishes the importance of the latter point to near zero in my eyes. what does the Ada community think? I am not in position to appreciate the consequences of either choice, and do not know whether this draft standard should be progressed, and would like to avoid an embarrassing mistake of helping to approve a standard that will be obsolete by the time its ink dries. I do not understand why IEEE decides to fast-track this standard now that Ada is in the final stages of its revision, so if anybody knows this, please let me know. your advice is greatly appreciated. # -- Microsoft is not the answer. Microsoft is the question. NO is the answer.