Document Number: WG21/N1039 X3J16/96-0221 Date: 26 January 1997 Project: Programming Language C++ Reply to: Dan Saks dsaks@wittenberg.edu Minutes ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG21 Meeting No. 17 10 - 15 November 1996 Royal Waikoloan Hotel Waikoloa, HI, USA 1 Opening and introduction 1.1 Welcome from host Plum convened the meeting at 18:10 (HST) on Sunday, 10 November 1996. 1.2 Roll call of technical experts The attendance list appears as Appendix A. 1.3 Select meeting chair Plum chaired the meeting. 1.4 Select meeting secretary Saks was the secretary. 1.5 Select language Plum suggested that WG21 conduct the meeting in English. No one objected. 1.6 Adopt agenda Plum presented the proposed agenda (document Kona-1), which WG21 accepted without change. 1.7 Select drafting committee WG21 discussed whether we need a drafting committee for this meeting to function as it has at past meetings. Plum asked WG21 to consider his recommendations from e-mail message c++std-admin-195. He also recom- mended that Saks and Unruh be the drafting committee for this meeting. 1.8 Approve minutes from previous meeting Saks submitted N0951 = 96-0133 for approval as the minutes of the previous meeting. WG21 accepted the minutes without change. 1.9 Review action items from previous meeting None. 1.10 Recognize documents None, other than the agenda (Kona-1). 2 Liaison reports 2.1 SC22 Plenary Report Plum reported on the most recent SC22 plenary. He said SC22 discussed standardizing Java. He didn't think this would affect WG21 very much. Plum explained that JTC1 and SC22 have been encouraging WGs to reduce operating costs by distributing documents electronically rather than on paper. In particular, they are encouraging WGs to use e-mail for small documents and use ftp or web sites (such as the one that Rumsby provides for WG21) for large documents. Plum said SC22 also discussed choosing a standard document distribution format. SC22 had been urging WGs to use SGML because it is standard- ized. However, when SC22 finally received a standard formatted in SGML, they couldn't cope with it. It appears that if SC22 hasn't already dropped SGML, they will eventually. Plum said there's a lot of interest in PDF within SC22. PDF seems to behave very consistently across platforms. WG21 discussed using Post- script vs. PDF. Some members have had problems with each at various times. Plum reported that SC22 discussed the copyright status of standards documents. The SC22 members disagreed with the ISO council decision that all documents submitted as part of a standards process become copy- right of ISO immediately upon submission. Plum said he and the Fortran convener drafted a recommendation from SC22 that JTC1 support the previous policy, that ISO asserts copyright to a document only when it becomes a DIS. After further discussion, Plum said the bottom line is that it's not clear if WG21 can place a copy of it's second CD-2 on a public ftp or web site. Plum explained that he drafted a letter of permission that grants ISO the right to use words drafted by WG21 members. He will ask all WG21 members who will be drafting parts of the CD to sign a copy of the letter so it will be clear that ISO has permission to use the text in the CD. 2.2 SC22/WG11 (Binding Techniques) report None. 2.3 SG22/WG14 (C) report Deferred to meeting with X3J16. 2.4 SC22/WG15 (POSIX) report None. 2.5 SC22/WG20 (Internationalization) report None. 3 New business 3.1 Review changes to working paper Deferred to the meeting with X3J16. 3.2 CD processing Plum asked for volunteers to review certain sections of the draft after this week's editing. WG21 discussed the criteria for resolving open issues regarding the draft. Plum reviewed guidelines he posted in e-mail message c++std- admin-216. Hartinger said Plum's criteria did not include one of his concerns, namely, that a recent change (such as to the template compila- tion model) can't be implemented. All the heads of delegations agreed that the week's objective is to ship the CD. Saks suggested that the real goal is not just to ship a CD but to ship one that will pass the next ballot. He noted that some national bodies (such as the UK) prefer stability in the draft. So the goal is not just to make the draft better -- it's to make it better with minimal changes. 4 Review and approve resolutions and issues None. However, Plum thought WG21 should convene at the end of the week to affirm the week's decisions. 5 Closing 5.1 Select chair for next meeting Plum volunteered to chair the next meeting. 5.2 Establish next agenda All agreed we won't make any substantive changes to the draft during the CD ballot. Plum said the SC22 plenary agreed that WGs can consider ballot comments as they arrive. A WG can meet to discuss comments, but can't ratify any changes. 5.3 Future meetings Xerox has offered to host the July, 1998 meeting in Rochester, NY, USA. Plum asked for a volunteer host for the November, 1998 meeting. Clamage tentatively offered Sun Microsystems. 5.4 Future mailings X3 distributes WG21+X3J16 documents within the US. Plum Hall pays X3 to send documents to the national bodies. 5.5 Assign permanent document numbers See SD-1 for document numbers. 5.6 Review action items None. 5.7 Any other business None. 5.8 Thanks to host WG21 thanked Plum Hall for hosting the meeting. 5.9 Recess WG21 recessed at 20:10 on Sunday and reconvened in joint session with X3J16. See the corresponding WG21+X3J16 meeting minutes (N1041 = 96-0223). Appendix A - Attendance Name Affiliation; (*) = Head of Delegation Lajoie, Josee Canada (*) Plum, Thomas Convener Hartinger, Roland Germany (*) Unruh, Erwin Germany Bruck, Dag Sweden (*) Jonsson, Fredrik Sweden Corfield, Sean UK Glassborow, Francis UK Rumsby, Steve UK (*) Clamage, Steve USA / X3J16 Chair Koenig, Andrew USA / Project Editor Nelson, Clark USA (*) Saks, Dan USA / Secretary