[J3] posts

[Steve Lionel]

My suggestion for a standing document that captures suggestions for 
future revisions was simply that, not something that required plenary 
discussion. My goal was to not lose track of ideas that came in too late 
to be considered for the previous revision. (However, I don't think it 
should list suggestions previously rejected by J3/WG5 "for cause".)

Ondrej and Gary have started a Github collection of other suggestions 
for future revisions, and I intend to mine that for ideas as well when 
the time comes. Since I wasn't at 220, I don't know what happened there, 
but I would not have expected 2Y features (other than generics) to take 
up plenary time there.

Steve

On 11/11/2019 12:46 PM, Dan Nagle via J3 wrote:
> Well, we have a consensus that generics will be a 202y feature.
> And plenary added the papers in 009 by consent.  Further papers
> for 009 should also have some level of plenary support.
>
> A worklist?  No.  But it is called a list of candidates,
> which seems reasonably accurate.
>