(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.4896) Result of vote on Corrigendum 2

[John Reid]

WG5,

Here is the tentative result of the vote on Corr 2. Please let me know 
of any problems by the end of Friday.

Best wishes,

John.
-------------- next part --------------
                                       ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG5 N1956-2

         Result of the WG5 letter ballot on draft Corrigendum 2

                         John Reid

N1954 asked this question

Please answer the following question "Is N1948, with the references and 
notes removed, acceptable for submission to SC22 for publication as
Corrigendum 2 for Fortran 2008?" in one of these ways. 

1) Yes.
2) Yes, but I recommend the following changes. 
3) No, for the following reasons.
4) Abstain.


The numbers of answers in each category were:
7 for 1) Yes (Chen, Corbett, Long, Moene, Nagle, Reid, Whitlock). 
3 for 2) Yes, but I recommend the following changes (Cohen, Muxworthy, Snyder)
0 for 3) No, for the following reasons
0 for 4) Abstain 

The ballot has passed. David Muxworthy and the interpretations group shall 
consider all the comments and make the changes that they consider 
appropriate. The convener shall send the resulting document to WG23. 


Here are the responses in detail:

Malcolm Cohen

Some typos that do not affect the actual corrigendum itself:

Edit [93:7-8] is interp F08/0061 not F03/0061.
Edit [286:12-13] is interp F08/0082 not F03/0082.
_______________________________________________________________________

David Muxworthy

My vote is yes, but I recommend the following changes.

1.  In the edit at 294:42-295:2, ?If ... undefined? should read 
    ?If ... undefined.?.

2.  In the edit at 296:4-5, a full stop should immediately follow 
    "effective argument".

3.  In the edit at 325:7-12, ?A program ... invoked? should read 
    ?A program ... invoked.?

_______________________________________________________________________

Van Snyder

Acroread complained about missing fonts.  Throughout, at least in my
acroread installation, the bold "a" does not appear.  This causes
"Subclause" to be "Subcl use" and "Example" to be "Ex mple".  The
document should be set with more generic fonts before being sent to ISO.

The editorial instructions for 10.7.5.2.2p4 specify [258:15-19].  This
ought to be [258:15-20].  This won't affect the official ISO-published
corrigendum.