standardization mtg agenda

[Chris Haynes <iuvax!chaynes@ee.ecn.purdue.edu>]

The following is offered as a tentative agenda for the proposed March
standardization meeting:

1) Presentation on standardization organizations and procedures
   (IEEE, X3, ...). 

2) Discussion of when should Scheme standardization begin. 

   I say when, not whether, because I believe it is inevitable sooner
   or later, for better or for worse.  If there are cogent arguments 
   for delaying a couple of years or so, we should here them.]

3) Discussion of which official standardization organization would be best
   serve our purposes.  

   This discussion can't really be separated from 2); for example, 
   I suspect IEEE standardization would be a good thing, but doubt 
   we should proceed if that is ruled out.

4) Develop a charter for the standardization working group.  

   I suspect we should keep this group separate from the R*S author's group.
   (To avoid confusion, I suggest we call the former the "working
   group" and the later the "report group".)  Clearly the working and
   report group memberships should have a large intersection, and
   their meetings might whenever possible be held back-to-back in
   the interest of those participating in both.  The purpose of the
   charter is to clarify the respective roles of the two groups.  For
   example, we could agree that no language feature be in the standard 
   that is not in the report, but allow the documents to differ
   somewhat in style and allow the reports to include experimental 
   features.  I see the present report as somewhere in between these
   two documents (some features might be left out in the standard and
   some less tried features might be added to the report).

5) Choose officers (Chair, Vice Chair, others if necessary) for the
   Working Group.  

   The umbrella standards organization actually appoints the officers
   (at least in the IEEE), but presumably they will accept our suggestions.

6) Discuss location, time and agenda of first working group meeting.

   This might be at the L&FP conference, or we might prefer to devote
   all the available time there to the report group meeting.

6) Discussion of the next report group agenda.  

   6) and 7) will be included only as time allows after the above items
   have been given adequate consideration.

7) Discuss possible changes to the R3RS for the standard.  

   This is clearly beginning the work of the working group, and should only
   be undertaken if their is time (unlikely) or some item is thought
   to be important enough that it will influence the decisions above.
   I would rather discuss things to leave out of the standard (there
   are several possibilities I can think of) instead of discussing
   possible additions (which are more the business of the report group).

8) Final consensus on points 2)-5) above.  

   Since the points for discussion above are tightly interwoven, we
   should probably conclude with a final motion for consensus.  
   (I hope voting is not necessary, and if it is a "clear majority",
   not a simple majority, should be in favor of whatever action 
   we resolve on.)

-- Chris