Reminder that this meeting is taking place tomorrow.

Once we complete the remaining design polls, I'd like to clarify what might be perceived as a conflict in our poll results for poll 3.2 vs polls 4 and 5; we can't state both that binary data may be formatted and that formatter output that doesn't match an expected encoding is UB.  Hubert's suggestion of an escape mechanism would suffice to resolve the apparent conflict.  Are there other ways to interpret these polls?  Or other solutions to resolve the apparent conflict?

Tom.

On 6/17/21 11:56 AM, Tom Honermann via SG16 wrote:

SG16 will hold a telecon on Wednesday, June 23rd at 19:30 UTC (timezone conversion).

The agenda is:

At the last telecon, we discussed addressing LWG 3565 as the first agenda item for this telecon.  However, I would prefer to finish polling for P2093R6 first as I expect some of the remaining candidate polls to be potentially relevant for the LWG issue resolution.

For reference, here are the P2093R6 polls and poll results taken during the last telecon (I'll get the meeting summary posted soon).  Consensus so far appears to be rather strong with the exception of poll 3.2.

The remaining candidate polls are:

Assuming good consensus on those polls, we'll poll forwarding P2093R6 to LEWG again with direction to revise the paper to align with SG16 feedback.  At a minimum, a revision will be expected to record SG16 direction and rationale.  In order to avoid spending more SG16 telecon time on this paper, we'll look for a volunteer to review the updated revision and report back to SG16.

Tom.