Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!shadooby!samsung!ctrsol!emory!cambridge.apple.com!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!mcsun!ukc!icdoc!sappho!cdsm
From: cdsm@sappho.doc.ic.ac.uk (Chris Moss)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.prolog
Subject: Re: More fun with WG17
Message-ID: <1378@gould.doc.ic.ac.uk>
Date: 22 Nov 89 17:35:02 GMT
References: <2609@munnari.oz.au> <696@sce.carleton.ca> <2643@munnari.oz.au> <715@sce.carleton.ca> <2780@munnari.oz.au>
Sender: news@doc.ic.ac.uk
Reply-To: cdsm@doc.ic.ac.uk (Chris Moss)
Organization: Logic Group, Dept. of Computing, Imperial College, London, UK.
Lines: 18

In article <2780@munnari.oz.au> ok@mudla.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Richard O'Keefe) writes:
>Quintus only came in when ANSI joined the fray.  While I was there, they
>were not involved at all.  They have had NO input into any of the drafts
>I have criticised.

Quintus was obviously not itself a member of the BSI committee, or the ISO
committee before the ANSI committee was formed, for obvious reasons. It's an
American company (even if many of its members hot-footed it from Edinburgh!)
But one should note:
    Several individuals from Quintus were on the mailing list for some time
      (including Richard of course) and they DID provide input.
    AI Ltd, the UK distributor for Quintus WAS on the BSI c'tee and if it
      didn't liaise with Quintus I'd be surprised.

I refer to the companies, but in fact it's mostly individuals that are on
committees.

Chris Moss.