Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!pitt!willett!ForthNet
From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: ANS FORTH TECHNICAL COMMITTEE
Message-ID: <2841.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>
Date: 2 Jun 91 14:09:35 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.
Lines: 32

Category 10,  Topic 2
Message 161       Sat Jun 01, 1991
B.RODRIGUEZ2 [Brad]          at 18:02 EDT
 
From Mitch Bradley:

> [Cost-benefit analysis] has been applied.  You just disagree with
 > the outcome.

Really, Mitch?  Can you honestly say that every addition and change to the
BASIS was subjected to a cost-benefit analysis?  (Before you answer, recall
that you were one of the many people who explained how the TC deliberations
were a _political_ process.)

> A TC can take a document back for changes at any time.

Thanks for the clarification, Mitch, and this is good to know -- but it misses
the point of my original posting, which was what can be done if the TC "digs
in its heels" and refuses to make changes to the BASIS.  Only ANSI can force
this, and no one knows where ANSI draws the line.

- Brad
 Brad Rodriguez        | brad%candice@maccs.uucp      (God willing)
 B.RODRIGUEZ2 on GEnie | brad%candice@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca
 "Shoes for industry!" | bradford@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca  (archaic)


-----
This message came from GEnie via willett.  You *cannot* reply to the author
using e-mail.  Please post a follow-up article, or use any instructions
the author may have included (USMail addresses, telephone #, etc.).
Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us _or_ uunet!willett!dwp