From ... From: Erik Naggum Subject: Re: Need another Lisp? (was Re: IS(O-)Lisp status?) Date: 1996/08/04 Message-ID: <3048169510832914@arcana.naggum.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 172010528 sender: erik@arcana.naggum.no references: <4t0b6d$ge1@trumpet.uni-mannheim.de> <01bb7bb4$21092dc0$368549c2@my-computer> <3047651927551504@arcana.naggum.no> <4u0im0$e13@tools.bbnplanet.com> organization: Naggum Software; +47 2295 0313 newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp [Barry Margolin] | Note that rejecting the standard is not one of the options on the | ballot. technically true, but irreconcilable comments do, in fact, constitute rejection. recall that the DIS stage may be the first opportunity a national body has to comment on a standard. | By virtue of the fact that they approved the DIS in the first place, | it's effectively a done deal that there will be an ISO ISLISP standard; | only small details can be changed at this point. who are "they"? CD->DIS is approved by P-members at the SC level. DIS->IS is approved by P-members at the TC level. 16 P-members of SC 22 approved of DIS 13816. that's not enough to carry it forward if the rest reject it. conclusion: there is ample room for rejection of ISLISP. voting on DIS 13816 terminates on 1996-09-23. #\Erik