From C.Cartledge@sheffield.ac.uk Tue Nov 30 10:39:50 1993 Received: from osiris.dknet.dk by dkuug.dk with SMTP id AA23508 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4j for ); Tue, 30 Nov 1993 09:41:40 +0100 X400-Received: by mta osiris.dknet.dk in /PRMD=minerva/ADMD=dk400/C=dk/; Relayed; Tue, 30 Nov 1993 09:41:01 +0100 X400-Received: by /PRMD=uk.ac/ADMD= /C=gb/; Relayed; Tue, 30 Nov 1993 09:41:08 +0100 X400-Received: by /PRMD=UK.AC/ADMD= /C=GB/; Relayed; Tue, 30 Nov 1993 09:36:00 +0100 X400-Received: by /PRMD=UK.AC/ADMD= /C=GB/; Relayed; Tue, 30 Nov 1993 09:41:00 +0100 X400-Received: by /PRMD=UK.AC/ADMD= /C=GB/; Relayed; Tue, 30 Nov 1993 09:39:50 +0100 Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1993 09:39:50 +0100 X400-Originator: C.Cartledge@sheffield.ac.uk X400-Recipients: sc24@dkuug.dk X400-Mts-Identifier: [/PRMD=uk.ac/ADMD= /C=gb/; Message-Id: To: SC24 list , IST/31 Subject: Re: (SC24.53) Apparent slow production of standards in SC24 (and SC22) (fwd) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 On Tue, 30 Nov 1993 Andre.Ducrot@inria.fr wrote: > Since your ISO paper does not give any example, it has no value. I > disagree with your last statement. This was may be our practice under > some other sub-committees. It is no more true. If you look to IPI, the > revision of GKS and CGM, you will find completely different time-scales. > > Regards > > Andre > Andre, In SC24 N1039, IPI FORTRAN is listed with no editor, as is GKS-9X Ada (no timescales), as are MANY of the PHIGS Am 2&3 (with timescales). Certainly SC24 is not doing it so much as previously but it is NOT true to say it is not done at all. Chris