Subject: [SG10] What form should our results take?
From: Nelson, Clark (clark.nelson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-01-24 18:26:26
OK, it's time to start actually using this reflector. I'm going to start a few threads. This one is organizational in nature; the others will be more technical.
Formally speaking, we are a study group operating under WG21, and our (only) power and responsibility is to forward recommendations to WG21. And of course WG21's basic power and responsibility is to forward documents to SC22, from which they will presumably continue up the chain to JTC1 and eventually be published.
If we were to take the framework in which we are operating as a straitjacket, then our only possible way to produce a result would be to recommend either modifications to the standard, or the creation of a new project for a technical report or specification.
I think we can consider producing our results in some other way, as was suggested in Portland, but (A) it's not clear to me that we have thought through the possibilities enough to decide it's the right thing to do, and (B) we need to be crystal clear with our convener, at least, what our plans are, since he will have to answer any questions that arise about them.
For the time being, it doesn't matter much, since in any event we have to produce a document describing what implementations should do and what programmers should be able to do, so everyone will know. But we should be thinking about what this document will eventually become, and how the C++ community will be made aware of it.
-- Clark Nelson Vice chair, PL22.16 (ANSI C++ standard committee) Intel Corporation Chair, SG10 (WG21 study group for feature-testing) clark.nelson_at_[hidden]
SG10 list run by email@example.com