From lrr@ironwood-fddi.cray.com Mon Jul 24 04:36:43 1995 Received: from timbuk.cray.com by dkuug.dk with SMTP id AA02417 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4j for ); Mon, 24 Jul 1995 16:37:26 +0200 Received: from sdiv.cray.com (root@ironwood-fddi.cray.com [128.162.21.36]) by timbuk.cray.com (8.6.12/CRI-8-1.15) with SMTP id JAA10713; Mon, 24 Jul 1995 09:36:46 -0500 Received: from hickory317 by sdiv.cray.com (5.x/CRI-5.15.b.orgabbr Sdiv) id AA02346; Mon, 24 Jul 1995 09:36:44 -0500 From: lrr@ironwood-fddi.cray.com (Larry Rolison) Received: by hickory317 (5.x/btd-b3) id AA07522; Mon, 24 Jul 1995 09:36:43 -0500 Message-Id: <9507241436.AA07522@hickory317> Subject: Re: (SC22WG5.833) URGENT Letter Ballot To: Miles.Ellis@educational-technology-resources-centre.oxford.ac.uk (Miles Ellis) Date: Mon, 24 Jul 1995 09:36:43 -0500 (CDT) Cc: sc22wg5@dkuug.dk In-Reply-To: from "Miles Ellis" at Jul 24, 95 12:15:56 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24-CRI-b] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 I will respond to Miles' comments and then let this matter drop as it takes too much time to debate this via email (and we aren't going to change each others' minds anyway). > > On Thu, 20 Jul 1995 at 11:25:01 -0500 (CDT) Larry Rolison said: > > >Comments on vote: I am opposed to the action taken in Tokyo with respect > >to these technical reports so I am not interested in speeding up the > >processing of them. This mechanism of language standard development is > >ridiculously anarchistic. Those people that think that this mechanism > >is a good idea should ponder this question for a bit: Would you set foot on > >an airplane that was designed in this manner? > > > > It seems to me that there is a fundamental misunderstanding here, as the > proposed TRs will still have to go through exactly the same international > review and approval procedure as will the full standard, in due course. I find it easier to not let the train leave the station than to try to stop a 125 at full speed. > > To respond to Larry's aeroplane analogy I would suggest that it is rather > as if the manufacturers of an airliner came up with a new feature which > would improve the fuel efficiency (or even safety!) of their existing > planes. They could either carry out exhaustive tests and then offer it as > a modification to their customers' existing aircraft, or they could carry > out the same exhaustive tests and introduce it only on their next major new > plane. I know which approach I would prefer! > > Miles > I was thinking more along the lines of what X3J3 (the alleged development body) and the TRs are doing. To continue the airplane analogy, X3J3 is trying to design an entire airplane while 3 other groups go off and independently design some wheel struts, some wings, and a tail assembly and then demand that their assemblies be glued onto the fuselage whether they fit or not. [As described to us in Maui, the TRs MUST be incorporated into the next standard VERBATIM. This is the point that set me and X3J3 off. If we're in the midst of designing some feature and the TR disagrees, X3J3 is plain out of luck - even though we might be trying to design some more general feature.] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Larry Rolison lrr@cray.com Cray Research, Inc. 655F Lone Oak Drive Eagan, MN 55121 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------