From rinehuls@access.digex.net Thu Oct 10 23:10:02 1996 Received: from access2.digex.net (qlrhmEbBUV1EY@access2.digex.net [205.197.245.193]) by dkuug.dk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id XAA02613 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 23:09:59 +0100 Received: from localhost (rinehuls@localhost) by access2.digex.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA03499 ; for ; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 18:09:21 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 18:09:20 -0400 (EDT) From: "william c. rinehuls" X-Sender: rinehuls@access2.digex.net Reply-To: "william c. rinehuls" To: yarnold winker , sc22docs@dkuug.dk Subject: Document SC22 N2311 - Vote Summary on LB 2158 - String Ordering Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII _________________________beginning of title page ______________________ ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22 Programming languages, their environments and system software interfaces Secretariat: U.S.A. (ANSI) ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22 N2311 October 1996 TITLE: Summary of Voting on CD Registration for: Inter- national String Ordering - Method for Comparing Character Strings and Description of a Default Tailorable Ordering SOURCE: Secretariat, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22 WORK ITEM: JTC 1.22.30.02.02 STATUS: The CD has been registered as CD 14651. CROSS REFERENC: SC22 N2158 DOCUMENT TYPE: Summary of Voting ACTION: To SC22 Member Bodies for information. To WG20 for preparation of a Disposition of Comments Report and a recommendation on the further processing of the CD. Address reply to: ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22 Secretariat William C. Rinehuls 8457 Rushing Creek Court Springfield, VA 22153 USA Tel: +1 (703) 912-9680 Fax: +1 (703) 912-2973 email: rinehuls@access.digex.net ___________________end of title page, beginning of voting summary ______ SUMMARY OF VOTING ON Letter Ballot Reference No: SC22 N2158 Circulated by: JTC 1/SC22 Circulation Date: 06-20-1996 Closing Date: 10-03-1996 SUBJECT: CD Registration for: International String Ordering - Method for Comparing Character Strings and Description of a Default Tailorable Ordering ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The following responses have been received on the subject of registration: "P" Members supporting registration without comment 11 "P" Members supporting registration with comment 0 "P" Members not supporting registration 1 "P" Members abstaining 4 "P" Members not voting 5 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Secretariat Action: The CD has been registered as CD 14651. The comment accompanying the abstention vote from Austria was: "Lack of expert resources". The comment accompanying the abstention vote from Germany was "Lack of manpower in this subject". The comment accompanying the abstention vote from Sweden was "Due to lack of expert resources". The comments accompanying the negative vote from the Netherlands have been forwarded to SC22/WG20 for preparation of a Disposition of Comments Report and a recommendation on the further processing of the CD. ________________end of generalized summary, beginning of detail ______ ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 LETTER BALLOT SUMMARY PROJECT NO: JTC1.22.30.02.02 SUBJECT: CD Registration for: International String Ordering - Method for Comparing Character Strings and Description of a Default Tailorable Ordering Reference Document No: N2158 Ballot Document No: N2158 Circulation Date: 06-20-1996 Closing Date: 10-03-1996 Circulated To: SC22 P, L Circulated By: Secretariat SUMMARY OF VOTING AND COMMENTS RECEIVED Approve Disapprove Abstain Comments Not Voting 'P' Members Australia (X) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Austria ( ) ( ) (X) (X) ( ) Belgium ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Brazil (X) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Canada (X) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) China ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Czech Republic ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Denmark (X) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Egypt ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Finland (X) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) France ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Germany ( ) ( ) (X) (X) ( ) Japan (X) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Netherlands ( ) (X) ( ) (X) ( ) Romania (X) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Slovenia (X) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Sweden ( ) ( ) (X) (X) ( ) Switzerland (X) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) UK (X) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Ukraine (X) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) USA ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) ( ) 'O' Members Argentina ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Bulgaria ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Cuba ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Greece ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Hungary ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Iceland ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) India ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Indonesia ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Italy ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Korea Rep ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) New Zealand ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Norway ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Poland ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Portugal ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Russian fed ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Singapore ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Thailand ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Turkey ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Yugoslavia ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) _________________end of detailed summary; beginning of comments _________ > The NNi votes NO on CD registration for > CD14651 (International > String Ordering) because of the following > reasons: > > -1- The NNi is of the opinion that the contents > of the default ordering > table is rather arbitrary. > It is unclear whether this is desirable for a > world standard. > Producers of software might misuse this > default ordering by claiming > conformance to it. > > -2- It seems unwise to depend upon a > specification defined in a standard > yet to be published (14652) (see section > 7.1). > That specification (symbolic data, table > structure and parameters) > seems to have overlap with parts of the > POSIX specifications. > The NNi suggests that this specification be > made into a separate document. > It is similarly unclear why tailoring of data > described in this document > to local user requirements should be > looked up in a separate standard > (see section 7.2). > > -3- The NNi is of the opinion that the > specification of the collating > method is not clearly formulated and is > only understandable after > experience with the POSIX documentation > has been obtained. > The NNi suggests that this standard be > rewritten in a clearer way. > > -4- In section 5.2 API-definitions appear. The > NNi cannot judge whether these > definitions are complete or whether they > overlap with other definitions > in (yet to be undertaken) other work. > It is also unclear where the semi-formal > style of specification > used in this section has been defined. > In addition, the definition of an API as 'an > application process' > (Clause 3) is an intolerable violation of the > normal practices of > separation of concerns and abstraction > levels, even with the addition > of `for the purpose of this international > standard'. > This definition should be replaced with the > `normal` API definition. > Consequently, where in clause 5.2 the > so-called API's are used to > explain the process, different terminology > should be used: the > document should not give the impression > that it defines the API's. > And (for heavens sake) an engine is not a > set of API's. > > -5- References to POSIX and C seem to be > missing from section 2. > > -6- The definitions in section 3 are unclear > and incomplete. > They seem to repeat definitions in other > standards however, without > making explicit what (perhaps) is > differently defined in this > standard. > > -7- In quite some places the document does > not conform to the ISO > directives, Part 3. > A few of them are mentioned here: > - The Foreword seems to serve no purpose > related to _this_ standard. > The Foreword is to be written by ITTF. > - The Introduction does contain tutorial > material; this material > should be moved to an informative annex. > - The Tutorial should also be placed in an > informative annex.. > - The definitions in section 3 should be > numbered. ____________________end of document SC22 N2311 _________________________