(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5900) [ukfortran] DIS ballot for revision of FortranStandard

[John Reid]

Malcolm Cohen wrote:
> I agree that going for a DIS ballot now means the October meeting is not
> useful for F2015, but OTOH going for a CD now makes the February meeting not
> useful for F2015... it is just that our meeting schedule is not well set up
> for a 5 month ballot period whenever that is.
>
> Also, as the J3 meeting is later in October, option 3 probably needs to be
> 2017-11 for "DIS ballot initiated" (you have to allow *some* time for the
> secretariat to do the admin thing!).  Which probably means +1 to some of the
> subsequent dates.

OK. I have added one to them all and now have

    CD determined                                     2017-06    J3/WG5
    CD ballot initiated                               2017-07
    CD ballot results available                       2017-09
    DIS constructed                                   2017-10
    DIS ballot initiated                              2017-11
    DIS ballot results available                      2018-04
    DIS revised                                       2018-05
    Standard published                                2018-08
>
> I will certainly go along with the majority view, but I don't see a big
> difference between "October useless" and "February useless"...
>
> Of course if we go the ++CD route I'll need to make a new document for the
> CD ballot.

Yes, sorry about that, but I was assuming that it would be easy. Please 
will you do it this week before you go on holiday, unless it becomes 
clear than most of us want to stay with the DIS option. It does make it 
possible for it all to be done sooner, but I do worry about further 
technical issues arising. October seems better than Feb. for working on 
these.

Cheers,

John.



> Cheers,
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Reid
> Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 7:36 PM
> To: WG5
> Subject: [ukfortran] (SC22WG5.5886) DIS ballot for revision of
> FortranStandard
>
> WG5,
>
> We (I) did not read the small print carefully enough. 2.6.1 of the
> Directives says "At the enquiry stage, the enquiry draft (DIS in ISO,
> CDV in IEC) shall be circulated by the office of the CEO to all National
> Bodies for a 12?week v vote. In JTC 1, the enquiry draft is a DIS. In
> JTC 1, the enquiry draft (DIS) shall be circulated for a 12 weeks vote,
> following a translation period of 8 weeks." We ignored the translation
> period, which is intended for national bodies to do whatever they think
> will make voting easier.
>
> This means that we cannot stay with the plans in N2129. In particular,
> the ballot comments will not be available at the October meeting. I
> think we should go back to having a second CD ballot.
>
> I have drafted a new "Strategic plans" document, attached. It contains
> revisions of the two timetables of N2129 and a new one based on a CD
> ballot now. I suggest that we go for the CD option. Is this OK for
> everyone? Please let me know what you think before Sunday.
>
> I'm sorry this has happened.
>
> John.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ukfortran mailing list
> https://lists.accu.org/mailman/listinfo/ukfortran
>
> _______________________________________________
> J3 mailing list
> J3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org
> http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3
>