Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!snorkelwacker!usc!cs.utexas.edu!longway!std-unix From: hlj@posix.COM (Hal Jespersen) Newsgroups: comp.std.unix Subject: Re: Standards Update, IEEE 1003.3: Test Methods Message-ID: <637@longway.TIC.COM> Date: 13 Apr 90 15:49:26 GMT References: <627@longway.TIC.COM> Sender: std-unix@longway.TIC.COM Reply-To: std-unix@uunet.uu.net Organization: POSIX Software Group, Redwood City, CA Lines: 36 Approved: jsq@longway.tic.com (Moderator, John S. Quarterman) From: hlj@posix.COM (Hal Jespersen) In article <627@longway.TIC.COM> From: > An Update on UNIX* and C Standards Activities > January 1990 > USENIX Standards Watchdog Committee > Jeffrey S. Haemer, Report Editor >IEEE 1003.3: Test Methods Update > ... >Each day was divided into two sessions: mornings, we did technical >review of parts I and II, afternoons were spent writing assertions for >part III. AT&T, NIST, OSF, Mindcraft, IBM, DEC, HP, Data General, >Cray Research, Unisys, Perennial and Unisoft Ltd. were represented. >[Editor's complaint: I see no user representation at all.] On the contrary, most of these organizations _are_ users--of the test suites to be produced. How do you define "user", anyway? If you mean application developers who work in small companies, maybe you should say "ISV". If you mean people who don't develop software, but use POSIX systems purely for services such as timesharing, office automation, or vertical applications, I can easily imagine why their management doesn't send them to POSIX.3 meetings or why they don't take vacation time to go on their own. But they can still be in the balloting group if they are interested. Hal Jespersen POSIX Software Group 447 Lakeview Way Redwood City, CA 94062 Phone: +1 (415) 364-3410 FAX: +1 (415) 364-4498 UUCP: uunet!posix!hlj -or- hlj@posix.COM Volume-Number: Volume 19, Number 67