Re: bibrefs in R5RS

[Matthias Felleisen <matthias@cs.rice.edu>]

Why don't you look at other reports and check what they cite?  I suspect
that a Report is like a paper. It cites those papers that contributed an
idea to the report.

The R5RS is like the Modula-3 report, which (if I recall correctly) cites
the Modula paper and the Modula 2 report but not every Modula paper ever
written or even every Modula 2 text book. To be more concrete, compare the
Indiana-Rice papers on a lambda calculus for Scheme with papers on the
denotational semantics of Scheme. The former contributed nothing to R5RS,
so they should probably not be cited; but the latter were the basis for the
semantics in the appendix. Or compare the impact of the Kohlbecker-Wand and
the KFFD papers with general papers on the usefulness of macros etc. The
former started the search for what is going in now; the others had a minor
impact on the search. 

If you wish to advertise the educational success of Scheme or if you wish
to cite papers that explain its usefulness, its underlying theory, etc, 
include a separate section where you list them. But, as Shriram points out,
the best solution is probably to point to a Web site that collects this
rapidly changing information. 

My two cents. Thanks for asking.

-- Matthias, The Original