[comp.lang.fortran] WG5 and X3J3 meetings

brainerd@unmvax.unm.edu (Walt Brainerd) (07/28/89)

The following is excerpted from the next issue of the _Fortran Journal_.
They represent my perception of what took place.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
WG5, the International Standards Organization group of Fortran experts,
met in Ispra, Italy July 10-14.
The main objectives were to review the work X3J3 has done over the
past year and provide additional direction to X3J3.
.pp
The resolutions passed mainly reflected an overall appreciation
of what X3J3 has done over the past year to implement the changes
recommended by WG5 last fall in Paris.
They understood how difficult it was to accomplish so much in the time given.
.pp
They were disappointed that X3J3 did some unnecessary additional things.
Examples are changing the ARRAY attribute to the DIMENSION attribute
and permitting structures in common blocks, but in the interest of getting
a standard out as quickly as possible, they did not pass resolutions
urging X3J3 to fix these things.
.pp
Only one item caused such grave concern that WG5 passed a resolution
requesting X3J3 to undo the mess they created.
This involves allowing a processor-dependent set of characters to be
used in Fortran programs, for example, to construct variable and
subroutine names.
The claim was made during the rush job X3J3 did in accepting this change
that the international community wanted this change.
However, all countries, including at least seven that use character
sets other than those of English, indicated that this would be a premature
solution to a wanted functionality and it well might prevent the
correct solution from being adopted at a later time.
This can and should be done after other committees complete current
work on the problem of how to handle this in all languages.
.pp
X3J3 met the following week in Vienna and devoted most of its
time to making editorial fixes to the document.
The processor-dependent character set problem was discussed
and most members of X3J3 present favored getting rid of it,
but the consensus was that the topic should be deferred until
after the comments on the current draft have all been received.
.pp
X3J3 will probably not vote any technical changes again until
January, 1989, but will continue to fix the text and small errors.
-- 
Walt Brainerd  Unicomp, Inc.  brainerd@unmvax.cs.unm.edu