The future of the Scheme standard

[Alan Bawden <Alan@lcs.mit.edu>]

   Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 17:17:35 -0400
   From: Matthias Blume <blume@cs.princeton.edu>
   > [ ... ]  Probably
   > most Implementors are Authors (in fact, I can't think of any who aren't).

   What is the definition of an `author'?  Anyone who appears on the cover
   of R4RS?  Then here is at least one implementor who isn't an author.
   I'm sure there are quite a few others.

All Apples are Fruit, but not all Fruit are Apples.  If you are on the
cover of R4RS then you are certainly an Author, but not all Authors have
their names on the cover of R4RS.  I have always thought of the "Authors"
as being the membership of this mailing list.  I don't think we have ever
needed to be more precise about it than that.  Of course you had to
show up in person at an Authors meeting to actually give proposals the
final thumbs-up or thumbs-down, but I don't imagine that there is anybody
on this list who would be turned away from such a meeting.

So in my eyes at least, you are an Author.

   Also, it isn't quite clear who qualifies as `implementor'.  If
   `implementor' means `anyone who is invited to that meeting', then
   apparently I'm not even that...

I have no idea what tests were applied by the workshop organizers.  I know
that I was rejected (the stated reason was that I was not an implementor),
and today I learned that Richard Kelsey was accepted -- those are my only
two data points.  Did you apply?  Personally, since I have experimented
with your Scheme implementation, I would say you were an Implementor.