[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


Here's my stab at a tentative agenda for the meeting.  Jonathan has
arranged for facilities from approximately 9:30am to 5:00pm on both
Saturday and Sunday, June 27 and 28.  An early action item will be to
come up with the actual agenda; but don't wait until then to flame
about this one!

I. Amenities

	-- introductions, etc.

II. Expectations for the meeting/procedure

	-- rules of the game (consensus, majority rule?) (who votes?)
	-- selection/assignment of secretary and chairperson
	-- discussion of the agenda -- priorities and scope, order, champions
	-- discussion of the documentary outcome

III. Meta-language issues

	-- formal/informal standardization (IEEE, ACM, ANSI???)
	-- yeller pages
	-- a standardized way to enforce/ensure conformance with the
	   standard [Jim Miller]

IV. Language issues

	-- multiple returned values       [Clinger]
	-- customizable reader            [Clinger]
	-- number syntax and exactness    [Bartley]
	-- macros                         [Rees]
	-- optional arguments             [Bartley]
	-- pattern matching               [Haynes]
	-- structures and opaque objects  [ ? ]
	-- environments and modules       [ ? ]
	-- error handling                 [ ? ]
	-- miscellaneous
		... `:' in symbols        [Bartley]
		... `integrable' declarations

I have no experience with the formalities of chairing meetings like
this, but I'm willing to open the meeting, present my agenda, and see
where we go from there.

Jonathan suggests that we allot each group 10 minutes or so at the
beginning for a brief presentation of their R&D efforts and goals,
implementations, user profiles, etc.  This might include some
philosophy on how Scheme fits their needs, where Scheme might evolve
to, and so forth.  Short presentations like this should serve to
introduce both the players and their philosophies.

This should lead naturally into a session for determining our
expectations for the meeting and the procedures to be followed.  It
would help if someone could explain the informal rules we've been
playing by since Brandeis.  After establishing ground rules, I think
we should determine the scope of the issues to be debated and their
relative priorities so that we can reorder the agenda as needed.  We
also should identify `champions' or proposers for each topic.

I thought we might want to discuss meta-language topics next, since
these may help shape the debate on the language issues themselves.
Two evident meta-issues are the `yellow pages' concept and the
question of formal standardization of the language.

My list of language issues follows Will's.  I've spawned `pattern
matching' from `optional arguments,' combined `environments' with
`modules', added `error handling' for Hal, and thrown a couple of
recent topics under the umbrella of `miscellaneous.'

It would help if people would announce in advance whether they are
prepared to make proposals or otherwise lead the discussion on a given
topic, particularly if more than one proposal is to be made on a topic.

I would also appreciate some indication of who plans to attend, and
which groups would like to make introductory presentations.  Please
post to this mailing list.

David Bartley