Subject: SC 22 N 3642 - Canadian National Body Report to the SC 22 Plenary

From: Matthew Deane <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 09:22:56 -0400

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22
Programming languages, their environments and system software interfaces
Secretariat:  U.S.A.  (ANSI)

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22 N3642

TITLE:
Canadian National Body Report to the SC 22 Plenary

DATE ASSIGNED:
2003-09-08

SOURCE:
Canadian National Body

BACKWARD POINTER:

DOCUMENT TYPE:
National Body Contribution

PROJECT NUMBER:

STATUS:
As this document was received after the 15 August deadline, it will be
reviewed at the upcoming SC 22 Plenary under Agenda Item 7.1 pending
approval for addition to the agenda.

ACTION IDENTIFIER:
FYI

DUE DATE:

DISTRIBUTION:
Text

CROSS REFERENCE:

DISTRIBUTION FORM:
Def

Matt Deane
ANSI
25 West 43rd Street
New York, NY  10036
Telephone:  (212) 642-4992
Fax:             (212) 840-2298
Email:  [email-masked]

___end of cover page, beginning of document____

National Body Contribution to ISO/IEC/JTC1/SC22 2003 Plenary
Canada supports ISO/IEC/JTC1/SC22 activities through a mirror group called
CAC-JTC1-SC22, chaired by S. Michell. We are active in the following WG's
WG 3 APL
WG 5 Fortran
WG 9 Ada
WG14 C
WG 15 POSIX
WG 20 Internationalization
WG21 C++
Linux Study Group
We are concerned about the lack of new projects, and about our difficulty to
effectively review standards submitted for fast track balloting, especially
when SC22 does not create a WG to manage the process. We see that part of
the difficulty is PAS submitter's desire to keep control of the work that
they have done, but we also believe that JTC1's requirement that WG's
produce documents to justify an NP is a significant part of the difficulty.
This summer we attempted to create an NP for Linux in conjunction with the
Linux Standards Base (LSB). While LSB is supportive of SC22 involvement,
they refuse to let JTC1 take ownership of the document, in part because they
feel that our processes are too slow. We can use the UK's TR as a
justification for a WG, but we need a motion to JTC1 asking for a new
category of WP to support work that is the subject of a PAS. We also wish a
motion that JTC1 make it a matter of policy that, at the request of an SC,
any document that is a subject of a fast-track will have an SC/WG formed to
review and participate in the maintenance of the document, even if the
maintenance remains with the PAS submitter, and that JTC1 will negotiate a
formal liaison with PAS submitter to give the SC/WG a voice in the process.
We do not support the motion to terminate WG15 at the same time that we are
considering making a new WG for Linux, which is almost-POSIX. We wish to see
the two groups combined in one WG, either WG15 or in a new WG.