Subject: Re: Agenda for the 2021-07-14 SG16 telecon
From: Jens Maurer (Jens.Maurer_at_[hidden])
Date: 2021-07-11 16:10:03
On 11/07/2021 00.12, Tom Honermann via SG16 wrote:
> We've had several discussions regarding the wording for P2295.Â Please review the latest wording in P2295R4 <https://wg21.link/p2295r4> and, if _objections_ (not just desired tweajs) remain, reply to this email to state them ahead of the meeting.Â My intention is to poll forwarding this paper with the expectation that core will further tweak the wording pending EWG acceptance.Â The SG16 obligation is to ensure that the intent of the paper is clear and that the proposed wording reasonably reflects it; I don't want to hold this paper up further unless it is felt that the wording misrepresents the intent.
The wording uses both "encoding scheme" and "encoding",
which might be misconstrued to be different things.
Please pick a term and use it consistently.
Regarding the uses of "determination"; this word (despite the
considerable effort on clarifications around it) still feels
that the compiler determines something (possibly by magic), but
in reality it is the user that conveys an (out-of-band) assertion
on the encoding of the source file. It feels English ought to
have a word or phrase that fits better than "determination".
Furthermore, agreed with Hubert's suggestions.
SG16 list run by firstname.lastname@example.org