Many thanks to Richard and Jonathan for their recent suggestions.

I have posted a new draft:

http://wiki.edg.com/pub/Wg21oulu/SG10/sd-6.html#recs.cpp17

It reflects most of the recent discussion. (I am not yet assuming we have
reached consensus about any/optional.)

I have also done quite a bit of editorial work.

One of the most significant changes is that I deleted most of the editorial
question marks indicating uncertainty about a proposal, calling attention for
review. What I'd like people to do is take a close look at the whole of the
C++17 content. (The insertion indications are relative to the posted SD-6,
so everything from Jacksonville and Oulu is considered new.)

What I have done instead is add an indication for every proposed macro for
which we don't yet have an example -- which is to say, for which we don't
yet have a rationale. I'd really like to get more examples -- but I don't
plan to do all the work of inventing them myself.

--
Clark Nelson            Chair, PL22.16 (ANSI C++ standard committee)
Intel Corporation       Chair, SG10 (C++ SG for feature-testing)
clark.nelson_at_[hidden]  Chair, CPLEX (C SG for parallel language extensions)