On 7/10/26 14:25, Vinnie Falco via SG19 wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 1:04 AM Guy Davidson <standard.guy_at_[hidden] <mailto:standard.guy_at_[hidden]>> wrote:
>
> It sounds to me like you are discussing part of the SG15 brief.
>
>
> I guess I was too subtle (lol). I'll say it plainly: stakeholders can charter a new Working Group under SC22. A sibling of WG21, not a study group inside it. The sole product is a second library standard for C++, with its own charter, its own convener, and its own tradeoffs on delivery and ABI.
>
> It sounds like the previous effort was competing for WG21's plenary time, which is its own obstacle.

Please read up on the history. I'm not aware of any specific proposal getting
anywhere near CWG, for example. So, I don't follow your claim that work
products of SG15 were actually competing for plenary time.

> That is evidence the committee is asuboptimal venue,

Meaningful C++-related work can be done outside of any ISO-sponsored committee.


Side note: Some of the papers orbiting SG15 had rather interesting copyright and
license claims. I'm pretty sure the one thing ISO is seriously concerned about
is anyone or anything getting in the way of ISO's full copyright ownership for
standards and other ISO publications, regardless of which SC or WG that
publication originates from.

Jens