ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 - Stockholm - November 1991 Minutes of Meeting 5-8 November 1991 Stockholm, Sweden Chair: John Hill US Vice Chair: Ron Elliott Germany Secretary: Martin Kirk UK Attendance: Canada Arnie Powell Head of Delegation Lionel Boiteau Patric Dempster Randall Howard Denmark Keld Simonsen Head of Delegation France Jean Michel Cornu Head of Delegation Germany Ron Elliott Head of Delegation Christian Brack Japan Nobuo Saito Head of Delegation Yukiharu Imafuku Akio Kido Yasushi Nakahara Netherlands Herman Wegenaar Head of Delegation Sweden Bengt Asker Head of Delegation UK Dave Cannon Head of Delegation Dominic Dunlop Don Folland Martin Kirk USA Donn Terry Head of Delegation Ralph Barker John Hill Jim Isaak Convenor Hal Jespersen Project Editor Roger Martin Pete Meier Paul Rabin Contents Attachments 1.0 Opening of Meeting 1 Attendance List 2.0 Status, Liaison and Action Item Reports 2 Agenda 3.0 Project Activities 3 Minutes of Small Group 1 4.0 New Business 4 Minutes of Small Group 2 5.0 Review/approval 5 Minutes of Small group A 6.0 Closing Process 6 Resolutions 7.0 Adjournment 7 Action Items 1.0 Opening of meeting The meeting was convened at 1405 by the chairman, John Hill. 1.1 Welcome from Host Jim Isaak, as Convenor, welcomed delegates on behalf of the host, the Danish Standards Institute. 1.2 Introductions & Roll call of Technical Experts Attendance list - See Attachment 1 1.3 Selection of Drafting Committee A drafting committee was formed, consisting of Arnie Powell, Ron Elliot, Ralph Barker and Yasushi Nakahara. 1.4 Adoption of agenda The agenda was adopted as appearing in Attachment 2. These minutes are structured as per the agenda. Where topics were discussed out of order, the discussion is minuted under the appropriate agenda item. 1.5 Approval of minutes Dave Cannon stated that action point 9010-40 erroneously included his name. It was deleted. Ron Elliott pointed out that the circulated minutes were incomplete. Attachment 3 stopped mid-way through Resolution 143 but should have gone on to resolution 159. This was attributed to a copying error. Arrangements were made for Resolutions 141-159 to be distributed during the meeting. Action 9111-13: Convenor to circulate missing resolutions in next mailing. Herman Wegenaar pointed out that he was omitted from Attachment 1. He was added to the list of attendees. Yasushi Nakahara noted that the Japanese delegation was incorrectly listed as including Shigekatsu Nakao, and that Yukiharu Imafuku had been omitted. Roger Martin queried a possible error in action point 9010-03. He asked whether P1003.4a should have been included. It was determined that the action point was correct. The minutes were approved as amended above after circulation of missing resolutions. 1.6 Action Items In the following, the notation 9010-# refers to an action from the October, 1990, meeting of WG15(Rosario); 9105-# to an action from the May, 1991, meeting (Rotterdam). 9105-01 Canadian member body: Notify the security Rapporteur of the name of its security Rapporteur. (Open action 9010-20.) Status: Done. 9105-02 Convenor & RIN: POSIX national profiles. Seek guidance from JTC1/SC22/WG20 on improvements to the practice of WG15's handling of national profile. (Open action 9010-9, 9006-37.) Status: Done. RIN is co-ordinating with WG20, but WG20 has not yet met. 9105-03 Convenor: Circulate, when received from the US member body, P1003.6 to WG15 experts for review and comment. (Will complete 9010-3.) Status: Done. 9105-04 Convenor: Co - ordinate RGCPA activities until the November meeting of WG15. Status: Done. 9105-05 Convenor: Distribute SC22-N796, language compatible arithmetic standard provided by Netherlands in response to 9010-2. Status: Done. 9105-06 Convenor: Forward final report of JTC1/TSG-1 to WG15 heads of delegation for review and comment. (Arises from agenda item 2.6, TSG-1 activity.) Status: Done. 9105-07 Convenor: Forward profile co-ordination ad hoc minutes, N1632 to SGFS for information. (Arises from resolution 117.) Status: Done. 9105-08 Convenor: Forward WG15RIN-N027 to WG20, Internationalis- ation and to SC2, SC18 and SC20. (Arises from discussion of issues list item, "multi-lingual, multi-directional presentation", under agenda item 2.2.) Status: Done. 9105-09 Convenor: Notify SC22 that the development of the Fortran and Ada language bindings to 9945-1 may exceed the two year period. (Arises from resolution 128.) Status: Done. 9105-10 Convenor: Report on status of resolutions 113, 119, 128, 129, 130, 136, 137, 150, 152,154, 155, 156, and 157. Status: Done? 9105-11 John Hill: Review all resolutions of WG15 to date and report to next meeting on the results of that review. Status: Done. N202 is the result. 9105-12 Isak Korn: Provide an annotated bibliography of known CEC, SOGITS, CEN/CENELEC, ITSTC, EWOS and other European documents of interest to WG15. (Open action 9010-18.) Status: Open. 9105-13 Member bodies: Designate to convenor single contact point for timely distribution by the convenor of letter ballot materials to heads of delegation for onward distribution to member body experts by working group secretariat. (Electronic mail or facsimile are preferred to physical mail.) (Arises from resolution 114.) Status: Done. 9105-14 Member bodies: Review final report of JTC1/TSG-1 in the context of the work of WG15 as soon as they can obtain them through any channel; forward reactions to their JTC1 representatives, and to other WG15 delegations for informal comment. (Arises from agenda item 2.6, TSG-1 activity.) Status: Done. 9105-15 National bodies: Nominate candidates for position of official liaison from WG15 to WG11 (Binding Techniques.) (Open action 9010-14) Status: Done. The US has nominated Paul Rabin. The action was passed to a small group to produce a liaison statement. 9105-16 National bodies: Nominate participants and rapporteurs for WG15 rapporteur group on co-ordination of profile activities. (Arises from resolution 120 - now 119.) Status: Done. Several rapporteurs have been nominated. Those from France and Japan need to be verified. The Rapporteur Group will meet in San Francisco in January. 9105-17 RGCPA: In the context of the requirements of TGS1, and taking into consideration concerns raised in Rotterdam about the word "implementation" and other matters, provide a draft informative annex to IS 9945-1:1990 titled "Implementation Variations (Information for Profile Writers)" which contains a list of those places where implementations can vary; a summary of the implications and consequences of making a particular selection; and possibly guidance regarding which possibilities should be preferred or avoided. Status: Open? 9105-18 Keld Simonsen & Johan van Wingen: Canvass and report back on the proposed POSIX definition of the word "byte" within SC2 and WG20. (Arises from discussion of inter- nationalisation under agenda item 2.7.) Status: Open. RIN discussed this issue at this meeting. There was some doubt as to whether the liaison should be with SC1 or SC2. 9105-19 Technical editor: Report to next meeting of WG15 on document structure issues arising from proposed incorporation of test methods material. (Arises from resolution 132.) Status: Open. The Project Editor has met with IEEE and RCT. There are still some outstanding issues. 9105-20 Technical Editor: Report on status of resolution 132. Status: Closed. (Duplicated 0105-19). 9105-21 US member body: Circulate character-set related parts of current draft of 1003.2 for review and comment by RIN. (Arises from 9010-7.) Status: Open 9105-22 US member body: Determine impact of the final report of JTC1/TSG-1 and, in particular, annex A, on the work of WG15. (Arises from agenda item 2.6, TSG-1 activity.) Status: Open. 9105-23 US member body: Forward WG15 - N145 (also numbered SC22-N963) AFNOR technical comments, to IEEE P1003.4 for consideration. Status: Done. 9105-24 US member body: Prepare a detailed schedule for the development and synchronisation of language-independent and C language binding amendments to 9945-1 for IEEE 1003.1A, 1003.4, 1003.6, 1003.8. Submit to WG15 for review and comment. (Action 9010-13 deemed open as a result of discussion.) Status: Open. 9105-25 US member body: Provide a written report on language binding issues, such as name spaces, for use by WG11 in providing a report on the nature and extent of any problems to the 1991 SC22 plenary. (Ref. SC22 AG recommendation F.) (Open action 9010-17.) Status: Closed. 9105-26 US member body: Provide copies of IEEE 1003.1:1990 interpretations made to date for distribution to WG15. (Arises from discussion of resolution 154.) Status: Done. 9105-27 US member body: Provide the then current draft of IEEE 1003.2A to SC22 Secretariat for registration as PDAM to 9945-2. (Open action 9010-12.) Status: Open. 9105-28 US member body: Provide WG15 with a summary list of changes between CD 9945-2.1 (IEEE P1003.2 draft 9) which was distributed to WG15 for registration as CD and the next draft which will be submitted for CD registration. This summary is to be provided in the form of editor's notes. (Modification of open action 9010-30.) Status: Open. 9105-29 US member body: Send WG15-N177, first 3 chapters of 1003.1 LIS, to SC22 secretariat for onward distribution to SC22 working groups for review and comment. (Arises from resolution 126.) Status: Open. (No Report.) 9105-30 US member body: Work in a suitable forum which may be set up by SGFS in order to harmonise the content of P1003.0 with the OSE extensions to TR10000. (Arises from resolution 117.) Status: Done. 9105-31 US member body: Report on status of resolutions 121, 125, 126, 131, 135, and 148. Status: Open. (No Report.) 9105-32 Liaison to WG11: Review the content of WG15-N1732 LIS guidelines, with reference to the work of WG11. (Arises from resolution 126.) Status: Open. To be restated to refer to the liaison from WG11 rather than an individual. 1.7 Identify Members & Schedules of ad hocs The meeting was divided into 3 ad hoc groups on Wednesday to address the issues listed below. Reports back from the ad hoc groups are minuted under the appropriate agenda items. The "raw" minutes of the ad hoc groups are provided as Attachments 32 4 and 5. SG1 Review and comment on 9945-2 contents (.2 and .2a) SG2 Review and comment on 9945-1 real time extensions (.4 and .4a) Include P1003.1 Language Independent Specification and P1003.16 C Language Binding issues in discussion. PCTE issues. SGA Administrative issues: New Projects Terms of Reference for Profile Co-ordination Interpretations Synchronisation Additional language bindings (Modula 2, Pascal) Handling of liaison statements Better handling of issues list. Synchronisation plan. The ad hoc groups were given directions to discuss issues and where possible produce first drafts of resolutions. Three possible deliverables were identified - Resolutions, Liaison Statements, and Disposition of Comments. Brief minutes of the ad hoc groups are provided as attachments to these minutes. 2.0 Status, Liaison and Action Item Reports This set of agenda items was intended to review written reports submitted prior to the meeting. It was not intended to hold major discussions on routine matters. It was pointed out that not everyone had had the opportunity to see documents N195-N200. The same applied to some documents distributed at the meeting. 2.1 Issues List Ron Elliott requested a review of the issues list. He felt that the rationale behind the issues were unclear and that some of the issues may have been resolved. The issues were reviewed and the status of each was determined as follows: 1 Closed 2 Open 3 Open 4 Closed (JTC1 has dealt with NPs) 5 Closed (SC22 N1063) Donn Terry and Dominic Dunlop proposed that WG15 should adopt the TSG-1 modus operandi for managing the issues list. The issue was referred to Small Group A. Roger Martin proposed that closing dates should be added to issues. 2.2 JTC1 actions affecting group 2.2.1 GOSI NP [JTC1 N1532] This issue was referred to Small Group A. Jim Isaak reported that JTC1 had asked for the Disposition of Comments be done by SC22. 2.2.2 PCTE proposal Jim Isaak reported that the PCTE documents had been approved by ECMA. ECMA 158 is the C binding. ECMA-149 is the abstract specification. PCTE has been proposed for ISO fast-track. SC7/SC22/SC21 have been identified as interested SCs. N201 addresses comments raised in N198. Professor Saito asked how PCTE and POSIX are related? N198 provides an initial attempt to define the common areas. Professor Saito stated that it was difficult to compare the PCTE Language Independent specification with POSIX. He asked what PCTE expected from WG15? John Hill suggested that a better comparison paper than N198 might be what was required. 2.3 SC22 action, Convenor Report Jim Isaak pointed out that there was an error in the report. The reference to SC22 N1038 should be to SC22 N1066. 2.4 Report on IEEE TCOS Standards Projects Donn Terry reported that the volume of material coming from the US is beginning to increase. Jim Isaak said that 15 documents will enter IEEE balloting in 1992, and 15 will complete balloting in 1992. There are currently 10 documents in ballot now. Keld Simonsen asked about the schedule for sending out IEEE documents for ISO Review and Comment. Don Terry said that this was covered in the synchronisation plan, N121. Keld Simonsen said that the Danish Standards organisation had problems with P1003.2. They had not seen drafts early enough. This issue was referred to Small Group A. Dave Cannon requested that comments should be provided in writing. Keld Simonsen said that they would be provided. 2.5 Liaison Reports: 2.5.1 C language, Ada, Fortran, Modula 2 No documents had been submitted in advance of the meeting. Jean Michel Cornu stated that N204 contained general comment on the Language Independent Specification, and N205 contained specific Fortran comments. Donn Terry reported that a PAR is in progress for a Fortran 92 binding to P1003.1. This proposed project may address the N205 comments. SC22/WG14 has sent a liaison statement to WG15 requesting that it should only refer to ANSI C. Donn Terry reported that reference to "Common C" were being removed as part of the process of developing the C binding to the Language Independent Specification. Action 9111-14: Danish Member Body to inform WG14 that references to "common C" are being removed as part of the development of the C binding to the LIS spec. 2.5.2 SC22/WG11 No document had been submitted in advance of the meeting. Paul Rabin reported that WG11 felt that it did not have D/ifficient resources to address all the issues raised by WG15. 2.5.3 PCTE PCTE was discussion in Small Group A. See also 2.2.2 above. 2.5.4 Security, SC27, SC21 In the absence of Kevin Murphy, Ron Elliott reported that SC27 had sent some liaison statements to WG15. 2.5.5 SC22/WG20, SC2/SC22 ad hoc Keld Simonsen reported that the SC22 ad hoc had been disbanded. The work has been transferred to WG20 which was meeting for the first time next week. 2.5.6 SGFS Arnie Powell reported that the SGFS sub-group meeting discussed changes to TR10000 to allow it to encompass Open Systems Environments (OSE). Areas of extension include definitions and conformance testing. An official report was needed. Jim Isaak said that there was a need to find a permanent liaison. The issue was referred to Small Group A. The next SGFS meeting is scheduled for June 1992. A report was requested from the Interim SGFS liaison, Andrew Walker, as an input to the Profile Co-ordination Rapporteur Group. Action 9111-15: Interim SGFS liaison to provide documents from SGFS Profiles sub-group meeting to WG15 along with cover note indicating what action should be taken. Professor Saito asked if a joint meeting was envisaged? Jim Isaak said that SGFS had suggested an ad hoc meeting to which any interested parties could come. Yasushi Nakahara said that SGFS had requested each SC working on profiles to participate. He asked how WG15 would contribute to the June SGFS meeting? The Rapporteur Group on Profile Co-ordination (RGPCA) is meeting in January 1992, and WG15 meets in May 1992. Ron Elliott agreed that as the SGFS output can only be discussed in January, it cannot be discussed by WG15 in time before the June SGFS meeting. Jim Isaak suggested that if necessary a letter ballot could be conducted. Ron Elliott asked whether WG15 was willing to delegate the responsibility of dealing with SGFS to RGPCA? It seems as if the timescales mean that everything needs to be delegated to RGPCA. Roger Martin reported that RCT has some serious concerns about SGFS actions. Profiles will not come quickly but WG15 needs to decide how to handle them. Arnie Powell said that changes to TR10000 will effect us. The changes will include the definition of profiles, and the identification of gaps. ISPs will have no gaps. Any identified gaps will be filled by extensions to base standards. It was not expected that RGPCA will pass resolutions direct to SGFS. However, SGFS will be aware at an informal level of what happens there. Jim Isaak said that RGPCA should try and identify questions that Member Bodies should consider in relation to SGFS issues before the May WG15 meeting. John Hill asked whether the RGPCA Terms of Reference would permit it to directly submit documents to SGFS? Donn Terry said that this question may be premature. Jim Isaak stated that WG15 would specifically have to empower them to communicate directly with SGFS. In the absence of any specific remit the rapporteur group would not be able to take such action. 2.6 Editor The Project Editor, Hal Jespersen provided a report, N221. He has held discussions with the ITTF. Dominic Dunlop asked why, in point 3c of the report, 2 sets of standards were needed for Language Bindings? Hal Jespersen replied that Language Bindings will have their own test assertions. He undertook to add clarification in his report for the next WG15 meeting. 2.7 Rapporteur Group report/status 2.7.1 Security Ron Elliott presented a report. The rapporteur group will not be meeting in New Zealand. The next meeting will be in Irvine, California, on January 13-15 1992 concurrently with the IEEE meeting. 2.7.2 Conformance Testing Roger Martin presented a report. The TET user group management committee will designate someone to communicate to RCT. Mindcraft and BSI Testing Services are forming a consortium, Software Testing International, to develop test suites. The next RCT meeting is scheduled for April 1-3 1991 in Gaithersburg. 2.7.3 Internationalisation Keld Simonsen presented a report on the RIN meeting. Several resolutions were brought forward to WG15. 2.7.4 Profile Co-ordination Jim Isaak reported that the rapporteur group would be holding its first meeting in January 1992 in San Francisco. It would be held the week after the January IEEE meeting. 2.8 TSG-1 Final Report (esp Annex A) Donn Terry stated that N238 contained the US response to the action items associated with this issues. It contained comments from POSIX Profile Steering Committee which were provided for information. John Hill reported that N228, (JTC1 N1642), contained an instruction, in item J, to SC22 to report on its current inter- nationalisation activities. As a working group of SC22, and especially given the existence of the Rapporteur Group on Inter- nationalisation which has been in existence longer than the newly formed WG20, WG15 could offer to assist in the disposition of this work. Yasushi Nakahara thought that WG15 and RIN were doing a good job. He could not imagine such a practical effort being undertaken elsewhere. He felt that WG15 should remain a major player in internationalisation under SC22, and should forward a recommendation to WG20. John Hill agreed that the role of RIN should be brought to the attention of SC22. Dominic Dunlop said that RIN needed to know if this was an issue restricted to POSIX or whether it was global in nature. If it was global, then it should be offered to WG20. Some issues are specific to POSIX and these should be explained to SC22. Keld Simonsen said that given item J WG15 should inform both SC22 and WG20 that it has been doing work in internationalisation and that it still has further work to do that is POSIX specific. Patric Dempster said that in addition WG15 needed to learn what WG20 is going to do. Action 9111-16: RIN to produce a summary of their I18N activities to provide to SC22. Action 9111-17: RIN to review and restate their scope of work as it was determined before the creation of WG20. Jim Isaak said that in response to N228 item C, WG15 is seeking liaison to SGFS. In response to item E, WG15 is liaising with other groups. As far as item F is concerned, P1003.0 may be related to it. Finally, in item I, the TSG-1 Final Report encourages working groups to provide annexes which document the characteristics of their standards. Action 9111-18: US Member Body to produce a response to N188 Annex A and N227 item I as follows: 1/. In the format of an Annex for 9945-1:1990 & proposed report to ITTF, for review at May 92 meeting; and to propose methods to address this issue for future documents, which may include: 2/. For documents currently entering the CD process, to include this material in an Annex of the DIS; 3/. for future CD documents, include an Annex of this form in the document being registered for CD. Donn Terry and Hal Jespersen queried to which documents this action item applied. Jim Isaak stated that initially it should apply to 9945-1:1990. It would apply to other documents as they are developed. Bengt Asker stated that the TSG-1 intent was that this should be a working paper which should exist throughout standards development. Professor Saito said that there was a need for effective liaison with SGFS. John Hill suggested that since there could be no liaison to SGFS until at least the next SGFS meeting in June 1992, Japan could submit a paper detailing specific requirements for that liaison. Yasushi Nakahara pointed out that the SC22 internationalisation responses were required before 15 April 1992. In that case, how was WG15 to develop its position? Jim Isaak said that RIN should be encouraged to do as much as possible by E-mail. John Hill suggested that the convenor should inform SC22 that their timescales are too short for WG15 to comply with, but that WG15 could provide the information by June 1992. Action 9111-19: Convenor to inform SC22 that: (a). WG15 has just become aware of the requirement to supply information on internationalisation activities; (b). WG15 believes that this is an important issue; (c). WG15 will be unable to complete this activity by April 1992; (d). WG15 will be able to complete this activity by June 1992. Pete Meier said that SC22 could refuse to extend their deadline. WG15 could draft a resolution that would provide some information concerning item J. 2.9 WG15 Priorities and Target Dates Jim Isaak said that at the last meeting WG15 felt it would be useful to provide feedback to US on priority, but needed to have information on current work. The issue was to identify any concern about national priorities in the US. This information had been appended to the agenda. Patric Dempster said that he thought P1003.3 had been approved for fast track at the last WG15 meeting. Jim Isaak said that this was not the case. An NP had been submitted. Dave Cannon asked what the phrase "expected window" meant. Was it CD status? Jim Isaak said that SD-11 was a more definitive document and contained clearer information. Professor Saito asked what was relation between ISO NP approval and IEEE activity? He asked what was the status of P1003.17? Jim Isaak said that it had been approved by JTC1. SD-11 has additional detail, and N2032 the US version of SD-11, has even greater detail. John Hill pointed out that Professor Saito had identified that the list circulated as part of the agenda was incomplete with respect to approved WG15 documents, and that there was no linkage with IEEE activities in the US. Yasushi Nakahara observed that the table shows the expected window and the resolution date. He asked which of these was the target date for circulation of the document to SC22? Roger Martin asked if SD-11 should include all ISO information as well as TCOS dates? Yasushi Nakahara said that this was not necessary, simply adding the circulation date as another column would be sufficient. Jim Isaak stated that TCOS status is solely concerned with IEEE work, the WG15 SD-11 should include ISO status. It should show what the next step was and the expected date for that step. Keld Simonsen proposed that status reporting should be descussed at the May 1992 meeting. It was agreed to agreed to add this as an agenda item. Dave Cannon pointed out that there are items on the TCOS SD-11 that are related to ISO milestones. If these were made clearer, it would probably answer everybody's questions. John Hill said that the US should be invited to provide a detailed explanation of the document, especially with respect to what the column headings really mean. 3.0 Project Activities - registration, balloting 3.1 9945-1 System Interface These issues were addressed by Small Group 2. The minutes of the small group are provided as Attachment 3. Dominic Dunlop presented the report from the group. Two issues from RIN had been raised in the group: (1). The exchange of files with names containing extended characters. Canada will canvass opinion within Canada and will liaise with Hal Jespersen. (2). The current inability of 'date' to output either the day number in the month or the month number in the year without a leading space or zero. Denmark will supply a proposal to fix the problem for discussion at the New Zealand meeting in May 1992. The small group identified the following action items: Action 9111-20: Danish Member Body to prepare and submit a specific proposal regarding conversions between code sets (based on charmaps, or otherwise; the proposal should give appropriate consideration to XPG iconv). Action 9111-21: WG15 Internationalisation Rapporteur to co-ordinate review and comment on the codeset conversion proposal with the IEEE-CS TCOS working group. Action 9111-22: US. Member Body to transmit N233 to appropriate working group within IEEE-CS TCOS. Action 9111-23: Japanese Member Body to convert ballot comments on 9945-2 CD2.2, when completed, to appropriate format for WG15 Issue Log and to forward same to Convenor for inclusion on May 1992 agenda. Action 9111-24:ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 liaison to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 to forward to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 the ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 Liaison Statement N229R and Resolution 176 (draft 2). Action 9111-25: Danish Member Body to expand and clarify proposal contained in RIN N0047 regarding usage of national characters (as defined in ISO 646 national positions), giving consideration that such proposal: (1) addresses all aspects of proposed standard, rather than JUST the shell, (e.g. it should work with not only shell but also regular expressions, awk, etc.) (2) should allow use of all features of the proposed standard, maintaining conformance, (e.g. currently proposed use of "--" would conflict with existing use) (3) should provide a general solution for similar requirements of other countries (4) should be sensitive to the cost/benefit ratio of imposing the solution in relation to existing implement- ations. 3.2 9945-2 These issues were addressed by Small Group 1. The minutes of the small group are provided as Attachment 4. Paul Rabin presented the report from the group. France has reviewed the existing Language Independent Specification Draft 1 and found it to be suitable for the existing Language Binding work, but had identified the need for extensions for some classes of programming languages. Some guidance was required on the priority that should be given to providing support for object-oriented languages such as C++. There was a need to prepare the ground for such issues in the revision of the 9945-1 LIS. The small group identified the following action items: Action 9111-26: US Member Body to forward Disposition of Comments N235R to US development body for consideration. Action 9111-27:US Member Body to provide a schedule for the development of LI version of P1003.4/4a. Action 9111-28: US Member Body to provide a response to WG15 regarding the disposition of WG15 N176. Action 9111-29: Member Bodies to review N224 and provide comments to the WG1 Convenor by March 1st, 1992. Action 9111-30: Member Bodies to review N223 and provide comments to the WG15 Convenor by March 1st, 1992. Action 9111-31: France to investigate co-ordination procedure between their Ada ExTRA and POSIX Real-time groups and to report back before the May 1992 WG15 meeting. Action 9111-32: US Member Body to forward N204 to P1003.1 for consider- ation, and to report back to WG15 a clarification of the scope of the current LI revision of 9945-1 with respect to support for non-procedural, dynamically-typed and object-oriented languages. Action 9111-33: US Member Bodyto produce document elaborating important issues which should be considered by Member Bodies in reviewing N222 and to provide the issues document to the Convenor for circulation to WG15. Action 9111-34: Convenor to circulate to WG15 the document elaborating important issues relating to LI after it is produced by the US. Action 9111-35: Member Bodies to review N222 and provide comments to the WG15 Convenor by March 1st, 1992. Action 9111-36: Convenor to forward the PCTE Liaison Statement N236 to ECMA TC33. 3.3 9945-3 No issues relating to 9945-3 were raised at the meeting. The Japanese delegation queried a communication that had been received relating to liaison between P1003.7 Software Management and SC21/WG4 OSI Software Management. It was agreed that P1003.7 should address this issue by liaison with the US TAG to SC21/WG4. 3.4 Language Bindings Language Bindings were addressed in Small group 2. 3.5 Technical Report - Guide to POSIX OSE Arnie Powell pointed out that at the Rotterdam meeting Resolution 135 had requested that the current draft of P1003.0 be circulated to WG15 before next meeting. Donn Terry replied that the IEEE had declined to forward the document at this time as they felt that the document was not yet ready for external release. Resolution 135 remains open and P1003.0 will be brought forward as soon as practicable. Roger Martin stated that P1003.0 is currently undergoing mock ballot. It is expected that the resultant revision should produce a draft suitable for forwarding to WG15. 3.6 Test Methods Arnie Powell queried whether Resolution 129 had requested that P1003.3 should be brought forward as an NP either for assignment to WG15 or submission for fast-track. Roger Martin reported that SC22 had sent it to JTC1, and were awaiting their approval. Arnie Powell proposed a new resolution, 182, which will allow a CD ballot to take place once the NP is approved. Donn Terry said that CD registration is necessary first. Jim Isaak suggested that the resolution should address concurrent CD registration and CD ballot. Arnie Powell reported that the SGFS sub - group discussed forwarding P1003.3 to SGFS for consideration. Action 9111-37: Convenor to forward IEEE P1003.3:1991 to SGFS as suggested by SGFS at their sub-group meeting in October 1991. 4.0 New Business 4.1 Report of Small group 1 See section 3.2. 4.2 Report of Small group 2 See section 3.1. 4.3 Report of Small Group A Small Group A addressed administrative issues. The minutes of the small group are attached as Appendix 5. Donn Terry presented the report of the group. WG15 will not develop its own taxonomy and believes that EWOS can deal with this. The key concern is to capture "gaps". WG15 Rapporteur Groups can and should consider holding their meetings concurrently with IEEE. The synchronisation plan appears to address all current issues. The small group reviewed the RIN resolutions and accepted 3 of them as WG15 resolutions. Yasushi Nakahara asked if the NP ballot on the P1003.0 Technical Report had completed. Jim Isaak reported that it was still in progress and would take at least another 4 months. Nakahara-san then asked what the relationship was between P1003.0 and EWOS. Ralph Barker said that they had common membership and some similarities. Nakahara-san, further asked whether, if there was no WG15 taxonomy, would P1003.0 leave EWOS to handle taxonomy and framework issues. Ralph Barker, said that there had been some framework discussion within a P1003.0 subgroup. Nakahara- san enquired when P1003.0 would be visible in WG15. Donn Terry said that it was just going into mock ballot, and it will be forwarded after that, when the NP has been approved. This was expected before the next WG15 meeting in May 1992. The small group identified the following action items: Action 9111-38: WG15 requests its Liaison to WG20 to ensure that they take notice of N228 Item j. Action 9111-39: US Member Body is requested to send a note to accompany the forwarding of N222 and N223 to the group doing the Modula 2 binding indicating the draft status of the documents. Action 9111-40: Member Bodies review N227 for comment by 31.03.92 and for action at the next meeting. Action 9111-41: US Member Body to reformat the current Issue list SD-3 into the proposed new format (derived from TSG-1) and submit to WG15 by March 31st 1992 for approval at the next WG15 meeting. Action 9111-42: Experts to give US Member Body text to fill in the text for expanded Open Issues SD-3 by 31.01.92. Action 9111-43:ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 liaison to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 to transmit to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 the then current version of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15/RIN's draft internationalisation ques- tionnaire N214 for review and comment by ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 and for their consideration in relation to their scope of work. Action 9111-44:ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 Liaison to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 to forward the ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15/RIN background paper N217R on internationalisation to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 for their consideration. Action 9111-45: US Member Body to provide sufficient information on IEEE POSIX Profile plans to the RGCPA meeting in January 1992. Action 9111-46:Danish Member Body to request interpretation from Geneva of problem (typo) noted in Annex F of 9945-1 to test what ISO does with such a request. 4.4 N229 Liaison Statement to WG20 Hal Jespersen said that the document needed some refinement. Dave Cannon asked if RIN could send the document itself. John Hill said that we should approve it based on past actions with respect to liaison statements. A small group consisting of Messrs Jespersen, Simonsen, Dempster and Nakahara was assigned to the task and a revised version, N229R was accepted. 4.5 N235 Disposition of Comments on PDAD registration Resolution 122 is in fact closed. The document was accepted with this change. 4.6 N236 PCTE Liaison Statement Professor Saito stated that PCTE has a wider scope than POSIX so the reference that platforms will have to support both PCTE and POSIX may be too strong. Jim Isaak asked if the reference should be narrowed to ECMA 148/159 rather than PCTE? Roger Martin said that there were already cases where both POSIX and PCTE were referenced so synchronisation must be arranged. The document was changed to specify ECMA 148/159. It was accepted with this change. 4.7 K15 TSG-1 Modus Operandi The working group agreed that the issues list should be translated into the TSG-1 format. There will be an agenda item for the New Zealand meeting to review the structure of the issues list in addition to its content. 4.8 N214 Internationalisation Questionnaire The actual copy forwarded will be reformatted but the content will be the same. The document was accepted on this basis. 4.9 N217 RIN Background Paper on I18N Yasushi Nakahara would like to add charbit to the document. In lieu of making changes at this meeting, the existing charbit text was removed from paragraph 4. Another document will be produced to address charbit. N217R was accepted with this modification accepted. 4.10 Options The following action item was identified: Action 9111-47: Project Editor and the US Member Body to develop a plan for the clear characterisation of options in WG15 standards, (considering the TSG-1 Final Report Annex A and TR10000 as a source of information), and to report back to the May 1992 WG15 meeting. 4.11 N202 Status of Resolutions Ron Elliott requested that everyone should review this document and check that it is correct. It should become a standing document after the May 1992 meeting. Discussion of the corrected document and its future maintenance will be included in the agenda of the May 1992 meeting. Action 9111-48: All Member Bodies to review N202 and check that the assessment of the state of all the resolutions is correctly recorded. Feedback should be provided to the chairman of the May meeting (Ron Elliott) prior to meeting. 4.12 Action Requests on Documents Roger Martin pointed out that the standard WG15 header sheets on documents contain an Action request field but almost all have nothing recorded there. A standard set of actions should be agreed. When documents are submitted to the convenor the originator should provide suitable guidance for the content of this field. Action 9111-49:Convenor to provide electronic version of standard cover page to Member Bodies for use in submitting documents. Action 9111-50: US Member Body to provide a paper providing the guide- lines for use of the cover sheet. 4.13 LIS Reorganisation The following action item was identified: Action 9111-51: Project Editor to work with the US Member Body to determine editorial reorganisations (i.e. selective reordering of clauses without normative effect) that may be necessary to promote Language Bindings to the LIS by "modular" languages, and to update the document structure plan, if appropriate and report the results to the May 1992 meeting. Professor Saito asked what the effect will be and how will it affect the Japanese translation effort? Donn Terry said that it would not generate any impact that would not already have been necessary to accommodate existing Language Binding work. Some reordering has already been done, e.g. in the Ada binding. Action 9111-52: Member Bodies to consider what means are appropriate to include technical corrigenda and proposed new functionality in a revised 9945-1 considering also the requirement that the LI work be done "with no net change" and to propose any recommendations at the May 1992 meeting. There was some concern that this might involve work that would be wasted if the basic principal that some change might be necessary was unacceptable. Jim Isaak asked if any Member Bodies have any objection to the ultimate work that might result following this plan? There were no objections. 5.0 Review/approval 5.1 Resolutions The Resolutions are provided as Attachment 6. 5.2 Action Items The Action Items are provided as Attachment 7. The list includes Action Items left open from previous meetings. 5.3 Issues List No further changes were made to the Issues List. The re- formatted version, with the status changes agreed earlier will be presented at the May 1992 meeting. 5.4 AOB A mailing list has been created for WG15. The e-mail address is sc22wg15@dkuug.dk. Donn Terry introduced a proposal to form 3 new Rapporteur Groups, corresponding to the 3 parts of 9945. The Rapporteur Groups would meet simultaneously with the IEEE meetings. The initial Rapporteur would be the chair of the appropriate IEEE group (P1003.1, P1003.2, and P1003.7). The minutes of the IEEE group would serve as minutes of Rapporteur Group. There was no expectation that experts or Member Bodies should attend all such meetings. Keld Simonsen said that this proposal would make it easier for some Member Bodies to participate in the IEEE process. Arnie Powell stated that it would also support the process of holding WG15 meetings in conjunction with the IEEE. John Hill invited the submission of proposals for consideration in this area. Professor Saito observed that IEEE meetings are less formal than ISO working groups and thus were harder for non-English speakers to participate. Roger Martin pointed out that the existing Rapporteur Groups are closer in style to IEEE Working Groups. 6.0 Closing Process 6.1 Future Meeting considerations-- Request for invitations Small Group A discussed a proposal for scheduling one WG15 meeting each year "in conjunction" with the IEEE POSIX meetings. This proposal was further discussed in plenary when considering future meeting locations. The next meeting is in New Zealand meeting on May 4-8 1992. The Japanese delegation pointed out that this revised date clashes with the Japanese "Golden Week". It was noted that no Vice-Chair had been identified for the New Zealand meeting and no candidate was forthcoming during the discussion. The convenor was instructed to identify a candidate. Action 9111-53: Convenor to identify a Vice-Chair for the New Zealand meeting prior to the meeting. Action 9111-54:Member Bodies to notify the New Zealand hosts on numbers of attendees at Rapporteur Group and WG15 meetings by the January 4th 1992 deadline. Identification of delegates who will be accompanied by spouses would be helpful. Small group A had not identified when WG15 should start having meetings "in conjunction" with the IEEE, nor had it defined what "in conjunction" precisely implied. It was felt that October 1992 would be the best time to start as the IEEE intends to meet in Europe. As yet the precise location of the IEEE meeting is unknown. Denmark, Germany, Netherlands and the UK all indicated a willingness to host a WG15 meeting depending on the eventual location of the IEEE meeting. Action 9111-55: Convenor to follow up on meeting location for October 1992 meeting once IEEE has a firm location. An attempt was made to summarise the various schedules with which WG15 is trying to co-ordinate. IEEE WG15 Other 1992 Jan 13-17 Irvine CA Jan 22-24 UniForum San Francisco Apr 6-10 Dallas TX May 4-8 New Zealand July 13-17 Chicago IL Oct 19-23 Europe Oct 12-16? UK/Denmark Oct 26-30 Open Forum Oct 26-30? Netherlands/Germany Utrecht 1993 Jan 11-15 New Orleans LA Apr 19-23 Boston MA UK? July 12-16 Hawaii Oct 11-22 Washington DC US? 1994 January Japan? April July Canada? October It was felt that the best candidate location for a synchronised meeting in 1993 would be Washington DC. Canada was identified as a possible candidate for a synchronised North American meeting in 1994. 6.3 Selection of Vice Chair & Secretary for next meeting The Chair of the next meeting will be Ron Elliott. Arnie Powell volunteered to act as secretary. 6.4 Agenda for next meeting Ron Elliott suggested that WG15 should start at 0900 on Tuesday in New Zealand. He was concerned that the Rapporteur Group meetings are eating into the time available for WG15 meetings. At the same time they were also generating more issues to be addressed in the reduced time. It was noted that WG15 is encouraging the Rapporteur Groups to meet separately from WG15, for instance with the IEEE. Jim Isaak asked if it would be acceptable to have the RIN meeting overlap with the small groups meetings. Ron Elliott did not believe that this would solve the problem. Arnie Powell supported the idea of starting early. Jim Isaak said that he did not expect the Rapporteur Group on profile Co-ordination to meet in New Zealand. He felt that WG15 should start at 0900 and that it should find some way for RIN to get another 1/2 day during the week. Keld Simonsen said that RIN could meet during IEEE meeting. Patric Dempster suggested that RIN could have a short meeting in New Zealand, and a long meeting with IEEE. The following agenda items arising from this meeting were identified: IEEE status reporting, Milestone descussion. Ballot comments on CD9945-2.2 in issue log format. Structure of issue log. Updated resolutions log. Options hanhling. Characteristics List for 9945 standards. Language Independent Specification re-organisation issues. 6.2 Document Number assignment Kista temporary documents were reviewed and the following were identified as permanent documents: Temporary Permanent Document Title(s) Number Number K1 N222 P1003.1 LIS D2 K2 N223 P1003.16 D2 K3(?) N224 P1003.8 D5 K5&K6 N227 Interpretations/Synchronisation Plan K7-9 N238 Unicode, PSC/TSG-1, USA Action Items K7-9 N228 JTC1/TSG-1 N1642 K13 N228 AFNOR comments on 9945-2 K16 N236 Liaison Statement to ECMA TC33 6.5 Thanks to Host A Resolution (183) was passed expressing the thanks of WG15 to the host and all those who had contributed to the success of the meeting. 7.0 Adjournment The meeting was adjourned by the chairman at 1600 on Friday November 8th, 1991. Attachment 1 Bengt Asker Sweden Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson Tel: +46 8 719 4660 S-126 25 Stockholm Fax: +46 8 719 3988 Sweden E-mail: bengt.asker@ericsson.se Ralph Barker US UniForum Tel: +1 408 986 8840 2910 Tasman Drive Fax: +1 408 986 1645 Suite 201 E-mail: rbarker@uniforum.org Santa Clara CA 95054 USA Lionel Boiteau Canada Information Technology Standards Tel: +1 613 996 5751 DCSEM 2-5-6 Fax: +1 613 992 0009 Directorate of Computer Systems E-mail: rob@dcsem.dnd.ca Engineering and Maintenance National Defence Headquarters MGen George R Peakes Building Ottawa Canada K1A 0K2 Christian Brack Germany Siemens Nixdorf Informationssysteme AG Tel: +49 89 636 44922 Otto-Hahn-Ring 6 Fax: +49 89 636 48976 W-8000 Munich 83 E-mail: brack@athen.uucp Germany David Cannon UK Computer Unit Tel: +44 392 263956 Mathematics and Geology Building Fax: +44 392 263108 Exeter E-mail: cannon@uk.ac.exeter EX4 4QU UK Jean-Michel Cornu France 69 Rue de Seins Tel: +33 1 6943 4847 91130 Ris orangis E-mail: jean-michel.cornu@afuu.fr France Patric Dempster Canada AT&T/NCR Tel: +1 416 599 4627 Systems Engineering Division E-mail: uunet!attcan!patric 320 Front Street West Toronto Ontario Canada Dominic Dunlop UK Oxford University Computing Service Tel: +44 865 2732 ILst Banbury Road Fax: +44 865 273218 1st Oxford E-mail: domo@ws.ox.ac.ukst OX2 6NN UK Ron Elliott Germany IBM Deutschland Tel: +49 7031 18 5097 Kst. 2751 Fax: +49 7031 18 5064 Bldg. 7032-87 E-Mail: elliott@aixsm.uunet.uu.net Postfach 90 08 80 D7000 Stuttgart 80 Germany Don Folland UK CCTA Tel: +44 603 69 4713 Gildengate House Fax: +44 603 69 4817 Upper Green Lane E-mail: def@cctal.co.uk Norwich NR3 1DW UK John Hill US Unisys Tel: +1 215 986 4565 MS E8-130 Fax: +1 215 986 5600 Box 500 E-mail: hill@prc.unisys.com Blue Bell PA 19424-0001 USA Randall Howard Canada 35 King Street North Tel: +1 519 884 2251 Waterloo Fax: +1 519 884 8861 Ontario E-mail: rand@mks.com Canada N2J 2W9 Yukiharu Imafuku Japan NTT Data Communications Systems Corp. Tel: +81 44 548 4555 Kowa Kawasaki Nishi-guci Bldg, Fax: +81 44 548 4420 66-2, Horikawa-cho Saiwai-ku Kawasaki-shi Kanagawa 210 E-mail: ima%rd.nttdata.jp@uunet.uu.net Japan Jim Isaak US Digital Equipment Corporation Tel: +1 603 884 3634 Ten Tara Blvd Fax: +1 603 884 3682 TTB1-5/G6 E-mail: isaak@decvax.dec.com Nashua NH 03062 USA Hal Jespersen POSIX Software Group Tel: +1 415 364 3410 447 Lakeview Way Fax: +1 415 364 4498 Redwood City E-mail: uunet!posix!hlj CA 94062 USA Akio Kido Japan IBM Japan (LAB-S16-A) Tel: +81 462 73 5436 1623-4, Shimotsurama, Yamato-shi, Fax: +81 462 73 7425 Kanagawa-ken 242 E-mail: kido@ymtl01.yamato.ibm.co.jp Japan Martin Kirk UK X/Open Company Ltd., Tel: +44 734 508311 Apex Plaza Fax: +44 734 500110 Forbury Road E-mail: m.kirk@xopen.co.uk Reading RG1 1AX UK Roger Martin US NIST Tel: +1 301 975 3295 Bldg. 225 Fax: +1 301 590 0932 Room B266 E-mail: rmartin@swe.ncsl.nist.gov Gaithersburg MD 20899 USA Pete Meier US IBM Tel: +1 512 838 3858 11400 Burnet Road E-mail: uunet!aixsm!meier Austin TX 78758 USA Yashui Nakahara Japan Toshiba Corporation Tel: +81 428 32 0733 2-9 Suehiro-Cho Ome-city Fax: +81 428 32 0408 Tokyo 198 E-mail: ynk@ome.toshiba.co.jp Japan Arnie Powell Canada IBM Canada Ltd. Tel: +1 416 946 3911 3600 Steeles Ave East Fax: +1 416 946 2535 Markham E-mail: arniep@eanum2.unat.ibm.com Ontario Canada D4/914 Paul Rabin US Nobuo Saito Japan Faculty of Environmental Information Tel: +81 466 47 5111 x3256 Keio University Fax: +81 466 47 50 ILs SB 5322 Endo E-mail: ns@sfc.keio.ac.jp Fujisawa 252 Japan Keld Simonsen Denmark DKUUG Tel: +45 33 13 0023 Studiestrade 6 Fax: +45 33 91 1828 DK-1455 Kobenhavn K E-mail: keld@dkuug.dk Danmark Donn Terry US Hewlett Packard Tel: +1 303 229 2367 3404 East Harmony Road Fax: +1 303 229 2838 Fort Collins E-mail: donn@hpfcla.hp.com CO 80525 USA Herman Wegenaar Netherlands University of Groningen Tel: +31 50 637052 Faculteit Economie Fax: +31 50 633720 Vakgivep BE Postbus 800 (Zermike complex) 9700 AV Groningen Netherlands Attachment 2: Agenda Agenda as adopted: 1. Opening of meeting 1.1 Welcome from Host 1.2 Introductions & Roll call of Technical Experts 1.3 Selection of Secretary & Drafting Committee 1.4 Adoption of agenda [N179r2] 1.5 Approval of minutes [N175] 1.6 Action Items [Written reports Please!] [N183,K7] 1.7 Identify Members & Schedules of ad hocs 2. Status, Liaison and Action Item Reports 2.1 Issues List [SD3] Chair 2.2 JTC1 actions affecting group [N180] Convenor 2.2.1 GOSI NP [JTC1 N1532] [K4=JTC1N1532] 2.2.2 PCTE proposal [N201] 2.3 SC22 action, Convenor Report [K12,K10,N182,N192,N193] Convenor 2.4 Report on IEEE TCOS Standards Projects [N203] U.S. 2.5 Liaison Reports: 2.5.1 C language, Ada, Fortran, Modula 2 ?? 2.5.2 SC22/WG11 Willem Wacker 2.5.3 PCTE [N201] Hugh Davis PCTE Capabilities & relation to POSIX [N197, N198] 2.5.4 Security, SC27, SC21 [N181, N196] Kevin Murphy 2.5.5 SC22/WG20, SC2/SC22 ad hoc [N187] Keld Simonsen 2.5.6 SGFS [N184, N191, N195] Andrew Walker 2.6 Editor [N ] Project Editor 2.7 Rapporteur Group report/status 2.7.1 Security [N168] Kevin Murphy 2.7.2 Conformance Testing [N169] Roger Martin 2.7.3 Internationalization [N170r] Keld Simonsen 2.7.4 Profile Coordination [N163,N165,N166] Convenor 2.8 TSG-1 Final Report (esp Annex A) [K8,K11,N188] Convenor 2.9 WG15 Priorities and Target dates Chair 3.0 Project Activities - registration, balloting [SD11,N203] Convenor 3.1 9945-1 System Interface --- Identification of 9945-1 Characteristics --- 22.21.01.01 System Interface [LIS] [N1732K1,N204,N205] 22.21.01.01.01 Security Amendment [N176] 22.21.01.01.02 Extensions to base 22.21.01.02 Real time extensions [N190] 22.21.01.02.01 Extensions to real time 22.21.01.03.01 Transparent File Access [K3] 22.21.01.03.02 Protocol Independent Interface 22.21.01.03.03 Directory Services Conformance & LIS 3.2 9945-2 --- Identification of 9945-2 Characteristics --- 22.21.02 Shell and Utilities base [CD2.2=SC22N1063,K13] 22.21.02.01 User Portability Extensions 22.21.02.02 Security Amendment 22.21.02.03 Additional utilities 3.3 9945-3 22.21.03 System Administration 3.4 Language Bindings 22.c C Language binding [K2] 22.a Ada Language binding 22.f Fortran Language binding [N205] 22.m Modula 2 3.5 22.x0 TR Guide to POSIX OSE 3.6 22.x3 Test Methods 4.0 New Business 4.1 ad hoc Report SG1 4.2 ad hoc Report SG2 4.3 ad hoc Report SGA 4.4 N229 Liaison Statement to WG20 4.5 N235 Disposition of Comments on PDAD registration 4.6 N236 PCTE Liaison Statement 4.7 K15 TSG-1 Modus Operandi 4.8 N214 Internationalisation Questionaire. 4.9 N217 R7N ill) ckground Paper on I18N 4.10 Options 4.11 N202 4.12 Action Requests on Documents 4.13 LIS Reorganisation 5.0 Review/approval 5.1 Resolutions Drafting Committee 5.2 Action Items Secretary 5.3 Issues List Vice Chair 6.0 Closing Process 6.1 Future Meeting considerations-- Request for invitations May 4-8, 1992 New Zealand [N199] Aug/Sept 92 Denmark (in conjunction with SC22 & WG11) April 93 UK (target) Sept. 93 Germany (target) April 94 Japan (target) Oct 94 Canada (target) 6.3 Selection of Vice Chair & Sectetary for next meeting 6.4 Agenda for next meeting 6.2 Document Number assignment 6.5 Thanks to host 7. Adjournment ============================================================================== WG15: Target Dates Projected balloting: IEEE 1003# Expected window Resolution PDAM 9945-1 .4/.4a Q3 91- Q1 92 May 92 PDAM 9945-1 .6 Q2 92- Q3 92 Aug 92 PDAM 9945-1 .8 Q2 92- Q3 92 Aug 92 CD 9945-1 revision ? CD ?? .16 ? CD 9945-2.2 .25 Q3 91- Q4 9 1 Nov91/May 92 PDAM 9945-2 .2a Q4 91- Q1 92 May 92 PDAM 9945-2 .6 Q2 92- Q3 92 Aug 92 CD ??? .3 Q4 91 [fast-track?] May/Aug 92 CD TR ?? .0 Q1 92- Q2 92 Apr. 93 Attachment 3: Minutes of Small Group 1 ======================================= Notes/Minutes ISO/IEC SC22/WG15 Small Group 1 November 6, 1991, Stockholm ======================================= Issues dealing with 9945-2 Applicable Documents: 1. SC22 N1063 9945-2 CD2.2 (P1003.2D11.2) 2. WG15 K13, AFNOR Comments 3. SC22 N967, UPE/D6 (SC22 R&C) 4. 3 documents from WG15 RIN: a. SRTN8, Japanese concerns re CD 9945-2 b. RIN N042, Ident entry in LC_CTYPE section of locales c. RIN SRTN7/N047, A representation for the shell in ISO 646 d. RIN N035, Proposal for building on other locales (replace after) New DS Issues: 1. Want pax -e in -2.2 Canada needs to have a meeting of their TAG to determine position. Will meet in December and advise Hal. >> no change to RIN disposition 2. Want uuencode/uudecode in -2.2 >> they will be in UPE PDAM 3. Want command to convvert between code sets based on charmaps Keld has indicated that DS has done this. The DS solution, however, is not known to the other members of the small group. >> KS to submit proposal. That proposal should be reviewed by RIN, with coordination with the IEEE working group, with the potential of being included in P1003.2b Ultimate solution should align, where possible, with technology of XPG4 iconv 4. date day format issues >> No change to RIN disposition ======================================= Discussion of pertinent documents ======================================= Hal Jespersen, P1003.2 chair, indicated that he would like NOT to limit comments and discussion to written papers - he would appreciate ANY comments relative to 9945-2 Small Group Objectives: 1. Identify Issues 2. If a consensus exists: - formulate recommendation to plenary - disposition of comments - liaison statement or resolution 3. If no consensus, summarize positions for plenary ATTENDEES: 1. Yasushi Nakahara, Japan 2. Patric Dempster, Canada 3. Randall Howard, Canada 4. Hal Jespersen, USA 5. Ralph Barker, USA 6. Dominic Dunlop, UK 7. Keld Simonsen, DS (part of time) 8. Jean-Michel Cornu, FR (part of time) ======================================= DOCUMENT DISCUSSION ======================================= 1. SC22 N1063 9945-2 CD2.2 (P1003.2D11.2) >> No specific comments on this document 2. WG15 K13, AFNOR Comments France wants -2 standard as quickly as possible- plans to vote yes, with comments on lex, yacc and make noted in paper. K13 comments are based on D11, which is over a year old. Some of the comments and questions MAY already be addressed in the current draft; Hal not able to address the questions specifically within the small group, absent participation of a Lex and Yacc expert. >> K13 should be registered as a WG15 document to enable transmittal to IEEE, and to make visible to other national bodies. Action on U.S. member body to transmit N_______ (K13) to appropriate working group within IEEE-CS TCOS. >> Minutes of WG15 should include information on how to get the CD draft via ftp, as noted below: ======================================= Assuming you have access to the Internet, the scenario is approximately: ftp research.att.com # research's IP address is 192.20.225.2 cd posix/p1003.2/d11.2 get toc index binary get p1-20.Z The draft is available in several forms. The table of contents can be found in toc, pages containing a particular section are stored under the section number, sets of pages are stored in files with names of the form pn-m, and the entire draft is stored in all. By default, files are ASCII. A .ps suffix indicates PostScript. A .Z suffix indicates a compress'ed file. The file index contains a general description of the files available. These files are also available via electronic mail by sending a message like send 3.4 3.5 a.2 from posix/p1003.2/d11.2 to netlib@research.att.com. If you use email, you should not ask for the compressed version. For a more complete introduction to this form of netlib, send the message send help ======================================= 3. SC22 N967, UPE/D6 (SC22 R&C) >> No specific input relating to this document 4. 3 documents from WG15 RIN a. SRTN8, Japanese concerns re CD 9945-2 - Japan would like to make this document visible to other countries - need to assign number although Japan plans to expand the document and deliver more detailed response before the end of the year. Japan needs to handle multiple char sets simultaneously, per ISO 2022; data files often contain various escape sequences which indicate which char set data follows; discussion of these requirements in relation to nature of LC_CTYPE: - Hal indicated that he did not feel that LC_CTYPE would prevent interpretation of command line args consistent with Japanese needs - item 3 on Pg2 of comments really deal with 9945-1 features? Japan has difficulty dealing with wide char data with traditional Lib C; would like to see wide char hanhling capabilities in .2 utilities, both for functionality and as an example of wide char hanhling for programmers. Japan is not sure whether it would be more appropriate to include wide char (ISO C/MSE) features in .1 or .2; .1a might be the appropriate place to include these extensions. (Although it might be feasible to include in the LIS spec, WG15 has told US body that LIS MUST be the same as the 1990 standard, thus no extensions could be included). Hal suggested that these comments be included in the Japanese ballot, so that they would be on record officially, and the US could deal with them as work on .1 AND .2 proceed. A Japanese "Yes" vote with this comment, creating a WG15 issue, would allow Hal to insist that extensions be included in .2b (and .1a) >> RIN SRTN8 should be registered to raise visibility to other national bodies, when Japanese ballot comments on CD2.2 arrive, add items to issue log for resolution prior to final standard approval. b. RIN N042, Ident entry in LC_CTYPE section of locales Hal's recommendation - "good idea that should be investigated, and Denmark should include in their ballot comments" Danish Standards would prefer to see this in DIS294but would be satisfied by inclusion in a future extension. Proposal need to be more specific in order to enable appropriate exploration. Is there an appropriate Liaison Statement for WG14, WG20? >> Ask WG20 to determine what character classes, identifiers being an important one, are needed in programming languages, so that appropriate features could be included in future POSIX standards. Include already identified concerns in Liaison Statement: 1) portability should be a high priority 2) possible impact of any such features on security (e.g. via manipulation of the set of characters available as identifiers) should be investigated, 3) solutions for the identified requirements should accommodate different types of languages (e.g. compilers vs. interpreters) US and UK see problem in putting in a solution that the C language standard is still working on - could result in inharmonious solutions. c. RIN SRTN7/N047, A representation for the shell in ISO 646 >> Proposal from Denmark relates to a long identified problem and an inconsistency with the recommendations of ISO TR10176 (programming languages should not use certain characters; note that TR10176 states that it may not be globally applicable, and seeks further input; 9945-2 may be a case in point), but the Danish proposal should be expanded and clarified so that it: 1) addresses all aspects of proposed standard, rather than JUST the shell, (e.g. it should work with not only shell, but also regular expressions, awk, etc) 2) should allow use of all features of the proposed standard, maintaining conformance, (e.g. currently proposed use of "--" would conflict with existing use) 3) should provide a general solution for similar requirements of other countries 4) should be sensitive to the cost/benefit ratio of imposing the solution in relation to existing implementations. Issue that proposal addresses is the ability of using national characters within file names etc, without impact on shell interpretation (e.g. Danish "slashed-O" occupies the same space as the POSIX pipe symbol, thus file names cannot include a slashed-O without the shell interpreting that character as a pipe). Presentation of national characters on displays and printers is a separate issue. d. RIN N035, Proposal for building on other locales (replace after) >> Consensus in RIN was that functionality of "replace after" should be explored (Canada volunteered to do some prototyping) >> Denmark should include proposal as part of their ballot comments. COPY statement exists in .2.2294but may work on binary data only (e.g. contents of locale after compilation) Canada had no technical objections to exploring functionality2 but was concerned about affect on existing consensus if a change is made at a late point in balloting, and potential effect on portability. Denmark position not final294but is seeking consensus on issue; if consensus is to explore inclusion in later extension of standard, that would be OK. Attachment 4: Minutes of Small Group 2 Notes of Small Group 2 (@ Indicates proposed actions, > indicates prnposed resolutions) Attendees: Paul Rabin, USA Martin Kirk, UK Yukiharu Inafuku, Japan Lionel Boiteau, Canada Jean-Michel Cornu, France Keld Simonsen, Denmark 1.0 Extensions to 9945-1 1.1 Realtime (1003.4) N190 Canada and UK voted in favour, but would prefer to see draft 10 registered with .4a as an annex. US failed to vote. France voted against, because "hard" real-time was not supported and .4 should not be registered without .4a. Resolutions 120 and 121 address this issue but remain open. Japan voted against on procedural grounds that PDAM adoption was proposed before NP was approved. This is a matter of regret but is now moot. It should be avoided in the future. Netherlands voted in favour but would have preferred LIS version. @Action: US to provide a schedule for the development of LI version of @ P1003.4/4a. Captured in Disposition of Comments document NXXX. @Action: US to forward Disposition of Comments to US development body for @ consideration. 1.2 Security (1003.6) [N176] Netherlands comments on D7. Already dealt with by US MB. @Action: Convenor to ensure that US has seen N176. 1.3 TFA (1003.8) [K3] K3 is D5 of TFA, produced after Parsippany meeting. @Action: Convenor to circulate K3 to WG15 for review and comment. @Action: MBs to review K3 and provide comments to the WG15 Convevor @ by March 1st, 1992. 1.4 Extensions to 9945-1 (P1003.1a) Possible documents from Denmark. @Action: US MB to forward docs to P1003.1 for consideration. 2.0 Language Bindings to 9945-1 2.1 C (1003.16) [K2] IEEE draft of P1003.16. First circulation within WG15. All overlap with C standard removed. This causes some normative changes. Slight changes to identifier namespace requirements. References to common usage C eliminated. Terminology of C standard used. Historical rationale eliminated. Some clarification of language. Some extension to C standard, errno, types, etc. New treatment of environment. @Action: Convenor to circulate K2 to WG15 for review and comment. @Action: MBs to review K2 and provide comments to the WG15 Convevor @ by March 1st, 1992. 2.2 Fortran (1003.9) [N205] AFNOR expert contribution. @Action: US MB to forward N205 to the group responsible for the development @ of the F90 binding to 9945-1 for consideration. 2.3 Ada (1003.5) Review and comment of the LIS D1 and 1003.5 by the French Ada community. Need to review the latest LIS draft. > Coordination between WG9 and WG15 Ada Real-time projects > > Whereas ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 has requested coordination between WG9 > and WG15 to ensure the coordination of the POSIX Ada real-time > project and the Extra Ada real-time project, and > > whereas ISO/IEC/JTC1/SC22/WG15 wishes to promote such coordination > > therefore wg15 requests menber bodies to nominate candidates for > WG15 liaison to wg9, and to establish similar liaisons within > their own nationsl standards organisations. @Action: France to investigate on coordination procedure between their @ Extra and POSIX Ada Real-time groups and to report back before @ the May 1992 WG15 meeting. > Coordination of Language Independent Specification and Language > Bindings > > Whereas wg15 recognises that there are technical requirements upon > the Language Independent Specification imposed by the need to > support current and future language bindings, > > Therefore wg15 recommends to sc22 that groups developing POSIX > language bindings participate actively in the development of > POSIX language independent standards in order to ensure that their > requirements are met. 3.0 9945-1 Language Independent Issues 3.1 Support for bindings [N204] AFNOR comments on D1 of LIS. Will LIS support LISP, C++, etc? Intent is that current version supports procedural, statically typed languages. Expected that LIS will be revised to support declarative, functional, dynamically typed languages when the need arises. As regards o-o languages, WG15 needs to indicate this requirement. C++ is expected to need to be addressed relatively soon. > LIS support for a wide variety of programming languages > > Whereas wg15 recognises that the current POSIX Language Independent > Specification supports bindings to procedural, statically-typed > programming languages, including all current language binding > projects, and > > Whereas in the future language binding projects can be anticipated > for dynamically typed and other classes of programming languages, > and > > Whereas wg15 recognises that therefore the POSIX language independent > specification will need to be extended to address the requirement > of such programming languages, > > Therefore wg15 requests the US member body to, wherever practical, > take into consideration the anticpated future requirements of such > programming languages. @Action: US MB to forward N204 to P1003.1 for consideration, and to report @ back to WG15 a clarification of the scope of the current LI @ revision of 9945-1 with respect to support for non-procedural, @ dynamically-typed and object-oriented languages. 3.2 LIS Draft 2 [K1] 3.2.1 Administration @Action: US to produce document elaborating important issues which should @ be considered by MBs in reviewing K1 and to provide it to the @ Convenor for circulation to WG15. @Action: Convenor to circulate to WG15 the document elaborating @ important issues relating to LI after it is prnduced by the US. @Action: Convenor to circulate K1 to WG15 for review and comment. @Action: MBs to review K1 and provide comments to the WG15 Convevor @ by March 1st, 1992. 3.2.2 Conformance What conforms to what? We have Applications, Implementations, Language Standards, Language Bindings, and Language Independent Specifications. 3.2.3 Storage Model Felt that storage model should be in abstract terms. Becoming clear that storage model should be described separately. Cannot simply be defined in abstract terms that are expanded in the LBs. Eg, definitions of ARGMAX, PATHMAX, NAMEMAX, read and write procedures, etc. 3.2.4 Grey Areas in LI vs LB 3 primary grey areas. 1: 1990 std required ALL language bindings to support 31 character, case-sensitive external identifiers. Is this an LIS issue? 2: Extensions - eg additional members in structures, mode_t bits other than the permission bits 3: Section 8 - How independent should the language features be of the POSIX features?If language defines some form of I/O then it must define the relationship between that and POSIX I/O. 3.3 Netherlands comments [N205, N173] Result of review of N173. @Action: US Member Body to pass N205 to P1003.16 for consideration. 4.0 PCTE [N197, N198, N201] The following liaison concepts were developed: 1). WG15 appreciates the efforts of ECMA TC33 to maintain a complementary relationship. 2). To avoid devergence WG15 requests feedback from ECMA TC33 WG15 projects. 3). WG15 should a). inform ECMA TC33 of relevant NPs. b). forward draft docs for R&C and identification of divergence. c). establish liaison to ECMA TC33. d). request MBs to review 9945 amendments in the context of PCTE. e). request ECMA Tc33 to continue liaison to WG15. f). request MBs to nominate liaison to ECMA TC33 from WG15. 4). Application platforms will be required to support both POSIX and PCTE. 5). PCTE implementations should be POSIX conforming applications with extensions. 6). For each divergence idetntified, WG15 and ECMA TC33 should decide whether convergence is needed, and the appropriate means for achieving such convergence. Captured in Liaison statement. @Action: Convenor to forward Liaison Statement to ECMA TC33. Attachment 5: Minutes of Small Group A The subgroup on administation met for a full day Wednesday. Participants: John L. Hill Chair Arnie Powell Canada Nobuo Saito Japan Akio Kido Japan Herman Weegenaar Netherlands Pete Meier USA Christian Brack Germany Ron Elliott Germany Donn Terry USA Dave Cannon UK Keld Simonsen Denmark Topics discussed (and summarized results): 1. NP's K4, K10, K12 GOSI Proposed NP K4 WG15 ask SC22 to let it resolve GOSI NP Ballots for them. Renaming of SC22 K10 Note with approval (no action) 7 WG15 NP's K12 (3,4) No action needed. 2. Terms of Reference: RG Profile Coord. K8, K11 Profiles Feedback from US K8 No action needed. JTC-1 Resln 18 K11 (-> N???) Noted that 18(j) would go to WG20. Action on WG20 liaison to deal with this. Draft proposed Terms of Reference Resolution to convener to tell RGP that it should draft its own ToR with initial values that it: Provide liaison to groups developing WG15 profiles Ensure coordination and harmonization of WG15 pr2239 ,) . Questions from WG15 to be addressed by RCP/SGFS. Is there anything we should recommend that RGP "push"? Resolution: Decision: Don't have WG15 develop its own taxonomy. Action: AI: US to provide comments on preliminary draft of revised TR10000 indicating the difference between that and current IEEE practice, to RCP in January. Action: AI: USA to prnvide information on IEEE Posix plans D/ifficient to request AEP developers to identify gaps so that WG15 can identify the work that must be done. How to do it in time for the SGFS meeting in June? No resolution. 3. Language Bindings K12 Modula-2 Binding K12 (3) Tell NZ that N222 (-1 LI) should be the basis for its work. Send them N223 (C Binding) for background and as model. Action: AI: on US to provide cover letter outlining limitations. It should be a thin binding. Instruct convenor to invite the right people to coordinate. Encourage members to nominate liaison to WG13 (Modula-2). Encourage WG13 to name liaison to us. Indication in resolution that this is good. Thanks to US showing significant progress on LI work. Fortran Comments on 1003.9 N205 Thanks to France for doing it, and pass it to USA. Action: AI: would the NB's consider a reorganization of .1 a "change"? 4. Synchronization N227, K12 Interpretations N227, K12 (?) Action: AI: N227 goes to NB's for review for comment, Action: AI: Discussion and actions resulting from these comments of N227 at NZ mtg. Action: AI: WG15 instructs convener to provide N227 to SC22 ad-hoc on interpretations. Action: AI: on Denmark on to send test case to Geneva. Process issue Keld (???) On joint meetings: suggest that the rapporteur groups be held jointly with IEEE, if they wish. Resolution to work out synchronization of WG15 and IEEE meetings so that there will be one end-to-end meeting a year (structured in any reasonable way). Discussion of concerns of synchronization issues. It was decided that the problems were handled by current synchronization plan. 5. Issues List Action: AI: US Member body to reformat issues list into "TSG-1" format, and submit for approval. (One time action to reformat and capture data.) Action: AI: Member bodies to provide "missing" text. Document cover pages should indicate relvant issue. 6. Liaison N196, K12 (6), RIN(8), RGCT N034 Create Liaison Statements K12 (6) Exchange of messages form SC27/WG1 has occurred. (Official Liaison is Kevin Murphy) Request Volunteers for liaison to PCTE (presuming that that is legal). Modula-2. See bindings topic above. Communication with WG20 is established. (Official Liaison is Keld Simonsen) Nominate Paul Rabin as WG11 Liaison. Volunteers for Liaison to SGFS. RIN Res A -> AI. B -> Internal to RIN. C -> Internal to RIN. D -> Resolution (but flawed as written) E -> AI. F -> Resolution (new wording). G -> Resolution (more or less as is). Liaison to SC21/WG4 (MO-AG) (N196): AI on Japan to contact letter addressee and give him contact information and indication that we'd welcome more information. 7. PCTE N197, N198, N201 Delegated to SG1/2 since they finished their work. 8. LIS (Added late from SG1) N222 & N223 are to be circulated for WG15 R&C. Resolution for comments back by March 1. Resolution to send N222 and N223 to WG11. Determined that for a C++ binding question there is no work in progress. K7 is strictly informative, no action required. ------------ Action Items 1. WG15 requests its Liaison to WG20 to ensure that they take notice of N228 Item j. 4. US National body requested to send a note to accompany N222 and N223 being transmitted to the group doing the Modula 2 binding outlining the limitations of the documents. 5. National Bodies to respond to the US by ???? (March 1) if they consider a reorganization of the 1003.1 LIS and C Bindings in consideration of modularization contrary to the mandate that the LI work should yield no changes. 6. National bodies review N227 for comment by 31.03.92 (to be mailed) and for action at the next meeting. 7. US Member Body to reformat the current Issue list SD-3 into the proposed new format (derived from TSG-1) and submit for approval at the next WG15 meeting. 8. Experts to give US Member Body text to fill in the text for expanded Open Issues SD-3 by 31.01.91. 9. RIN Res A, restated as AI 10. RIN Res E, restated as AI 11. Convenor to supply Profiles Convenor with points to consider in creating its Terms of Reference, and direct it to do so. 12. US to provide comments on preliminary draft of revised TR10000 indicating the difference between that and current IEEE practice, to RCP in January. 13. US to provide information on IEEE POSIX plans sufficient to request AEP developers to identify gaps so that WG15 can identify the work that must be done. 14. (Is this needed as WG15 AI? Ask Denmark) Denmark to request intepretation from Geneva of problem (typo) noted in Annex F to test what ISO does with such a request. 15. (Standing AI, or on Convenor?) Documents written which address Issues on the issues list should indicate which issue they address. 16. Japan to contact addressee of N196 and give him contact information and indication that WG15 would welcome more information. Action Items closed the same day: 2. Give WG15 document # to K11 (228) 3. Assign K1 & K2 permanent WG15 # 222 & 223 6. K5 & K6 permanent WG15 # (227) Attachment 6: Resolutions 160. OSI Directory Services: Security Conflict Concerns Whereas it is the desire of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 that the POSIX security extensions become a part of the ISO/IEC work, and Whereas it has been noted that the ACLs as defined in ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 N234 (IEEE 1003.6 Draft 12) conflict with those defined in ISO/IEC 7498-4 and 7594-8, (refer to document ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 N220), and Whereas ECMA PCTE also defines the access control function, Therefore, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 requests the US Member Body to investigate the concerns expressed in ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 N220 and propose a solution to these issues, also taking into account the ECMA PCTE work, and to provide this to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 for its next meeting. 161. ECMA PCTE Security Functions Whereas, JTC1 Project 22.21.01.01.01 defines audit and access control functions as defined for POSIX, and Whereas, ECMA PCTE (ECMA 149 and 158) also defines audit and access control functions, Therefore, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 requests the US Member Body to review the ECMA PCTE (ECMA 149 - Abstract Specification & 158 - C Language Binding) with respect to its security functions, and to report back the findings at the next ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 meeting. 162. ISO/IEC JTC1 N1532 (GOSI Proposal) Whereas ISO/IEC JTC1 has instructed ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 to respond to ballot comments on ISO/IEC JTC1 N1532, Therefore, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 requests that its Convenor inform ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 that ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 is interested in and prepared to assist in the development of responses to ballot comments. 163. Invitation to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG13 Whereas ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG13 is undertaking the development of a POSIX binding for the MODULA-2 programming language, Therefore, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 invites experts from ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG13 to meet with ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 at the upcoming ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 meeting scheduled for May 1992 in New Zealand. Further, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 invites ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG13 to appoint a liaison to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15. 164. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 Liaison to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG13 ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 requests its Member Bodies to nominate candidates for the position of Liaison to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG13 (Modula-2). 165. Language Independent Bindings: US Member Body ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 thanks the US Member Body for demonstrating significant progress in the production of the Language Independent Revision and C-Language Binding for ISO/IEC 9945-1. 166. AFNOR Comments on P1003.9 ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 thanks the French National Body (AFNOR) for ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 N205 and asks the US Member Body to forward it to the US Development group for their further action. 167. Interpretations Synchronization ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 instructs its Convenor to forward ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 N227 to the convenor of the ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 Ad Hoc on Interpretations with the request that the convenor of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 provide feedback for the next ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 meeting. 168. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 N222 & N223 to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG11 Whereas ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 work on the Language Independent Specifications is approaching the balloting phase, and Whereas it is essential to incorporate any pertinent requirements as soon as possible, Therefore, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 instructs its Liaison to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG11 to forward ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 N222 & N223 to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG11 for its review and comment. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 further instructs its Liaison to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG11 to forward any comments provided by ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG11 to the US Development Group for LIS as soon as the comments become available. 169. Appointment of Paul Rabin as ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG11 Liaison ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 appoints Mr. Paul Rabin as ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 liaison to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG11. 170. SGFS Liaison ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 requests its Member Bodies to nominate candidates for the position of Liaison to ISO/IEC JTC1/SGFS. 171. PCTE Liaison ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 requests its Member Bodies to nominate candidates for the position of Liaison to ECMA TC33. 172. Coordination between WG9 and WG15 Ada Real-time projects Whereas ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 has requested coordination between ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG9 and ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 to ensure the coordination of the POSIX Ada real-time project and the ExTRA Ada real-time project, and Whereas ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 wishes to promote such coordination, Therefore ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 requests member bodies to nominate candidates for ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 liaison to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG9, and to establish similar liaisons within their own national standards organizations. 173. Coordination of Language Independent Specification and Language Bindings Whereas ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 recognizes that there are technical requirements upon the Language Independent Specification imposed by the need to support current and future language bindings, Therefore, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 requests ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 to instruct its working groups developing POSIX language bindings to actively participate in the development of POSIX language independent standards in order to ensure that the requirements for their language bindings are met. 174. LIS Support for Programming Languages Whereas ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 recognizes that the current POSIX Language Independent Specification supports bindings to procedural, statically-typed programming languages, including all current language binding projects, and Whereas in the future language binding projects can be anticipated for dynamically - typed and other classes of programming languages, and Whereas ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 recognizes that the POSIX Language Independent Specification may need to be extended to address the requirement of such programming languages, Therefore, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 requests the US Member Body to take into consideration the anticipated future requirements of such programming languages. 175. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 and IEEE POSIX Meetings Whereas the workload associated with the development of international standards has significantly increased with a corresponding increase in the need for cooperation and clear communications between the members of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 and the community of POSIX technical experts, Therefore, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 plans to schedule at least one ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 meeting a year in conjunction with a scheduled IEEE POSIX meeting. 176. Possible Internationalization New Projects: Request to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 Whereas a draft Guideline for Producing POSIX National Profiles (ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 N212) and sample national profiles for Denmark (ISO/IEC 9945-1:1990) and Japan (ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 N213) have been produced, and Whereas ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 has determined that the publication of the Guidelines for POSIX National Locales and the Japanese and Danish National Locales would be desirable for the purpose of providing sample material for other national bodies in the development of their national locales, and Whereas ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 has determined, in concert with the UniForum and X/Open internationalization working groups, that in order for locales to interoperate properly, particularly in a networked or distributed computing environment, a locale registry procedure would be desirable, Therefore ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 requests ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 to consider points 1-3 below, and in each case to indicate, giving rationale: a. agreement or disagreement regarding the desirability of each of the NP proposals; b. whether ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 wishes to sponsor the NP itself or, alternatively, whether ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 recommends sponsorship of the NP proposal by ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15. 1) An NP to support the publication of a Technical Report on generic guidelines for POSIX National Profiles, 2) An NP to support the publication of a Technical Report of guidelines for development and collection of National Locales, 3) An investigation of the development of an international locale registry that would satisfy the requirements of national bodies and users, and any NP that may result from such an investigation. 177. Byte Definition request to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC1 Whereas ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 has determined that inconsistencies exist in the definition of the word "byte" between various ISO standards, and that such inconsistencies may adversely affect the functionality and portability of applications within the POSIX environment, and Whereas existing definitions do not accommodate the concept of multi-byte characters introduced in ISO/IEC 9899 and referenced in ISO/IEC 9945-1:1990 and CD 9945-2.2, Therefore, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 requests its Convenor to forward the following to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC1: The following is a suggestion for the definition of "byte", as a refinement of the definition appearing in ISO/IEC DIS 2382-1 (ISO/IEC JTC1/SC1 N1176) so that it does not conflict with the one appearing in CD 9945-2.2. byte: A string that consists of a number of bits, treated as a unit, and representing a character or a portion of a character. The suggested definition contains the current definition, suffixed with "or a portion of a character". The two notes in the original definition remain unchanged. 178. Rapporteur Group on Coordination of Profile Activities Whereas ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 has requested its Convenor to schedule an ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 Rapporteur Group on Coordination of Profile Activities (RGCPA) meeting and, Whereas it is critical to the needs of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 that this Rapporteur group become productive before the next meeting of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15, Therefore, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 instructs its Convenor to give the following guidance regarding Terms of Reference to the ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 RGCPA for its first meeting:  Propose liaison to groups developing profiles which reference the work of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15.  Ensure coordination and harmonization of profiles referencing the work of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15. and requests the ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 RGCPA to recommend their Program of Work and Terms of Reference at the next meeting of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15. 179. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 Liaison Whereas it is desirable that programming languages allow the use in identifier names of a richer alphabet than that defined by the Invariant Subset of ISO 646, and Whereas it is desirable that programming languages agree on the classes into which characters may be divided, and Whereas ISO/IEC CD 9945-2.2 defines several utilities with input statements syntaxes that approach the complexity of formal programming languages, and Whereas a general solution to these problems is preferred to solutions specific to ISO/IEC 9945-2 utilities, Therefore, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 requests that ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 review, comment and take appropriate action on ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 N229R. 180. Reply to ISO/IEC JTC1 N1642 Whereas ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 has been requested to provide a report on internationalization activities being done within ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 working groups, and Whereas ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15, its development bodies and organizations which provide input to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 sponsored standards activities, have had on-going international- ization efforts for a number of years, including the following efforts: 1. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 Rapporteur Group on Inter- nationalization has been active for approximately two years, 2. ISO/IEC 9945-1:1990 includes internationalization features (locale, character set support, including multi-byte character sets, etc) contributed in part by the UniForum Technical Committee Working Group on Internationalization, which has been active for approximately eight years and has been identified by the US development body, IEEE-CS TCOS, as a technical resource for its working groups for internationaliz- ation, 3. ISO/IEC CD 9945-2.2 includes additional international- zation features, including extended character set support, support for different cultural user aspects (eg collating sequences, time and date formats) which are used by all utilities specified within ISO/IEC CD 9945-2.2, 4. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 RIN, Danish Standards S142u22, IPSJ/ITSCJ POSIX WG (Japan), and the U.S. development body (working groups within IEEE-CS TCOS) maintain common membership which contributes to coordination and harmonization efforts, 5. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 RIN has been active in promoting work in the area of national profiles and national locale definitions, including contributions from the Danish and Japanese member bodies, and, Whereas ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 believes that it has the technical expertise to continue sponsoring internationalization work relating to POSIX standards, Therefore ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 submits the foregoing information for consideration by ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 in preparation of its report to ISO/IEC JTC1 (pursuant to ISO/IEC JTC1 N1642, section 18(j)), and requests that internationaliza- tion work relating specifically to POSIX continue to be assigned to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15, with coordination between ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 and ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20. 181. Responses to ISO/IEC DIS 10646 Whereas ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 is concerned that the proposed ISO/IEC DIS 10646 as stated in ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2 N745 will meet with substantial resistance in implementation for reasons outlined in ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 N215, Therefore ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 Member Bodies are requested to take these reasons into account in establishing a ballot response to ISO/IEC DIS 10646. 182. CD Ballot for POSIX Test Methods Whereas it is expected that ISO/IEC JTC1 will approve in the near future the NP relating to POSIX Test Methods, Therefore ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 requests ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 Secretariat to initiate a concurrent CD Registration Letter Ballot and CD Ballot, based on IEEE Std. 1003.3 - 1991, when the NP is accepted by ISO/IEC JTC1 and assigned to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22. 183. Appreciations ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 thanks the Swedish Institute of Standards, SIS-ITS, and especially Mr. Bo Viklund, Ms. Ann Flod, Ms. Ingvor Flygare, Ms. Filippa Setterwall and Mr. Raimund von der Emden for hosting this meeting. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 thanks Mr. John Hill for chairing the meeting. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 thanks Mr. Martin Kirk for acting as secretary for the meeting. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 thanks Mr. Ralph Barker, Mr. Ron Elliott, Mr. Yasushi Nakahara and Mr. Arnie Powell, for participating on the Drafting Committee. Attachment 7: Action Items Action 9111-01: Isak Korn: Provide an annotated bibliography of known CEC, SOGITS, CEN/CENELEC, ITSTC, EWOS and other European documents of interest to WG15. (Open action 9010-18.) Action 9111-02: RGCPA: In the context of the requirements of TGS1, and taking into consideration concerns raised in Rotterdam about the word "implementation" and other matters, provide a draft informative annex to IS 9945-1:1990 titled "Implementation Variations (Information for Profile Writers)" which contains a list of those places where implementations can vary; a summary of the implications and consequences of making a particular selection; and possibly guidance regarding which possibilities should be preferred or avoided. (Open action 9105-17.) Action 9111-03: Keld Simonsen & Johan van Wingen: Canvass and report back on the proposed POSIX definition of the word "byte" within SC2 and WG20. (Open action 9105-18.) Action 9111-04: Technical editor: Report to next meeting of WG15 on document structure issues arising from proposed incorporation of test methods material. (Arises from resolution 132.) (Open action 9105-19.) Action 9111-05: US member body: Circulate character-set related parts of current draft of 1003.2 for review and comment by RIN. (Arises from 9010-7.) (Open action 9105-21.) Action 9111-06: US member body: Determine impact of the final report of JTC1/TSG-1 and, in particular, annex A, on the work of WG15. (Open action 9105-22.) Action 9111-07: US member body: Prepare a detailed schedule for the development and synchronisation of language-independent and C language binding amendments to 9945-1 for IEEE 1003.1A, 1003.4, 1003.6, 1003.8. Submit to WG15 for review and comment. (Open action 9010-13 deemed open as a result of discussion.) Action 9111-08: US member body: Provide the then current draft of IEEE 1003.2A to SC22 Secretariat for registration as PDAM to 9945-2. (Open action 9010-12.) Action 9111-09: US member body: Provide WG15 with a summary list of changes between CD 9945-2.1 (IEEE P1003.2 draft 9) which was distributed to WG15 for registration as CD and the next draft which will be submitted for CD registration. This summary is to be provided in the form of editor's notes. (Modification of open action 9010-30.) Action 9111-10: US member body: Send WG15-N177, first 3 chapters of 1003.1 LIS, to SC22 secretariat for onward distribution to SC22 working groups for review and comment. (Arises from resolution 126.) (Open action 9105-29.) Action 9111-11: US member body: Report on status of resolutions 121, 125, 126, 131, 135, and 148. (Open action 9105-31.) Action 9111-12: Liaison to WG11: Review the content of WG15-N173 LIS guidelines, with reference to the work of WG11. (Arises from resolution 126.) (Open action 9105-32.) Action 9111-13: Convenor to circulate missing resolutions in next mailing. Action 9111-14: Danish Member Body to inform WG14 that references to "common C" are being removed as part of the development of the C binding to the LIS spec. Action 9111-15: Interim SGFS liaison to provide documents from SGFS Profiles sub-group meeting to WG15 along with cover note indicating what action should be taken. Action 9111-16: RIN to produce a summary of their I18N activities to provide to SC22. Action 9111-17: RIN to review and restate their scope of work as it was determined before the creation of WG20. Action 9111-18: US Member Body to produce a response to N188 Annex A and N227 item I as follows: 1/. In the format of an Annex for 9945-1:1990 & proposed report to ITTF, for review at May 92 meeting; and to propose methods to address this issue for future documents, which may include: 2/. For documents currently entering the CD process, to include this material in an Annex of the DIS; 3/. for future CD documents, include an Annex of this form in the document being registered for CD. Action 9111-19: Convenor to inform SC22 that: (a). WG15 has just become aware of the requirement to supply information on internationalisation activities; (b). WG15 believes that this is an important issue; (c). WG15 will be unable to complete this activity by April 1992; (d). WG15 will be able to complete this activity by June 1992. Action 9111-20: Danish Member Body to prepare and submit a specific proposal regarding conversions between code sets (based on charmaps, or otherwise; the proposal should give appropriate consideration to XPG iconv). Action 9111-21: WG15 Internationalisation Rapporteur to co-ordinate review and comment on the codeset conversion proposal with the IEEE-CS TCOS working group. Action 9111-22: US. Member Body to transmit N233 to appropriate working group within IEEE-CS TCOS. Action 9111-23: Japanese Member Body to convert ballot comments on 9945-2 CD2.2, when completed, to appropriate format for WG15 Issue Log and to forward same to Convenor for inclusion on May 1992 agenda. Action 9111-24:ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 liaison to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 to forward to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 the ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 Liaison Statement N229R and Resolution 176 (draft 2). Action 9111-25: Danish Member Body to expand and clarify proposal contained in RIN N0047 regarding usage of national characters (as defined in ISO 646 national positions), giving consideration that such proposal: (1) addresses all aspects of proposed standard, rather than JUST the shell, (e.g. it should work with not only shell but also regular expressions, awk, etc.) (2) should allow use of all features of the proposed standard, maintaining conformance, (e.g. currently proposed use of "--" would conflict with existing use) (3) should provide a general solution for similar requirements of other countries (4) should be sensitive to the cost/benefit ratio of imposing the solution in relation to existing implement- ations. Action 9111-26: US Member Body to forward Disposition of Comments N235R to US development body for consideration. Action 9111-27:US Member Body to provide a schedule for the development of LI version of P1003.4/4a. Action 9111-28: US Member Body to provide a response to WG15 regarding the disposition of WG15 N176. Action 9111-29: Member Bodies to review N224 and provide comments to the WG1 Convenor by March 1st, 1992. Action 9111-30: Member Bodies to review N223 and provide comments to the WG15 Convenor by March 1st, 1992. Action 9111-31: France to investigate co-ordination procedure between their Ada ExTRA and POSIX Real-time groups and to report back before the May 1992 WG15 meeting. Action 9111-32: US Member Body to forward N204 to P1003.1 for consider- ation, and to report back to WG15 a clarification of the scope of the current LI revision of 9945-1 with respect to support for non-procedural, dynamically-typed and object-oriented languages. Action 9111-33: US Member Bodyto produce document elaborating important issues which should be considered by Member Bodies in reviewing N222 and to provide the issues document to the Convenor for circulation to WG15. Action 9111-34: Convenor to circulate to WG15 the document elaborating important issues relating to LI after it is produced by the US. Action 9111-35: Member Bodies to review N222 and provide comments to the WG15 Convenor by March 1st, 1992. Action 9111-36: Convenor to forward the PCTE Liaison Statement N236 to ECMA TC33. Action 9111-37: Convenor to forward IEEE P1003.3:1991 to SGFS as suggested by SGFS at their sub-group meeting in October 1991. Action 9111-38: WG15 requests its Liaison to WG20 to ensure that they take notice of N228 Item j. Action 9111-39: US Member Body is requested to send a note to accompany the forwarding of N222 and N223 to the group doing the Modula 2 binding indicating the draft status of the documents. Action 9111-40: Member Bodies review N227 for comment by 31.03.92 and for action at the next meeting. Action 9111-41: US Member Body to reformat the current Issue list SD-3 into the proposed new format (derived from TSG-1) and submit to WG15 by March 31st 1992 for approval at the next WG15 meeting. Action 9111-42: Experts to give US Member Body text to fill in the text for expanded Open Issues SD-3 by 31.01.92. Action 9111-43:ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 liaison to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 to transmit to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 the then current version of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15/RIN's draft internationalisation ques- tionnaire N214 for review and comment by ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 and for their consideration in relation to their scope of work. Action 9111-44:ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15 Liaison to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 to forward the ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG15/RIN background paper N217R on internationalisation to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 for their consideration. Action 9111-45: US Member Body to provide sufficient information on IEEE POSIX Profile plans to the RGCPA meeting in January 1992. Action 9111-46:Danish Member Body to request interpretation from Geneva of problem (typo) noted in Annex F of 9945-1 to test what ISO does with such a request. Action 9111-47: Project Editor and the US Member Body to develop a plan for the clear characterisation of options in WG15 standards, (considering the TSG-1 Final Report Annex A and TR10000 as a source of information), and to report back to the May 1992 WG15 meeting. Action 9111-48: All Member Bodies to review N202 and check that the assessment of the state of all the resolutions is correctly recorded. Feedback should be provided to the chairman of the May meeting (Ron Elliott) prior to meeting. Action 9111-49:Convenor to provide electronic version of standard cover page to Member Bodies for use in submitting documents. Action 9111-50: US Member Body to provide a paper providing the guide- lines for use of the cover sheet. Action 9111-51: Project Editor to work with the US Member Body to determine editorial reorganisations (i.e. selective reordering of clauses without normative effect) that may be necessary to promote Language Bindings to the LIS by "modular" languages, and to update the document structure plan, if appropriate and report the results to the May 1992 meeting. Action 9111-52: Member Bodies to consider what means are appropriate to include technical corrigenda and proposed new functionality in a revised 9945-1 considering also the requirement that the LI work be done "with no net change" and to propose any recommendations at the May 1992 meeting. Action 9111-53: Convenor to identify a Vice-Chair for the New Zealand meeting prior to the meeting. Action 9111-54:Member Bodies to notify the New Zealand hosts on numbers of attendees at Rapporteur Group and WG15 meetings by the January 4th 1992 deadline. Identification of delegates who will be accompanied by spouses would be helpful. Action 9111-55: Convenor to follow up on meeting location for October 1992 meeting once IEEE has a firm location.