Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!lll-winken!uunet!aussie!rex
From: rex@aussie.UUCP (Rex Jaeschke)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: New US Rep to ISO C
Message-ID: <14.UUL1.3#5077@aussie.UUCP>
Date: 27 Apr 89 17:20:40 GMT
References: <443@hcr.UUCP>
Organization: Journal of C Language Translation
Lines: 32

> In article <6.UUL1.3#5077@aussie.UUCP> rex@aussie.UUCP writes:
> > At this stage, the 
> >chances of having identical ANSI and ISO standards is very very good.
> >(I have also been a member of X3J11 since December 1984.)
> 
> 	I was at the Seattle ISO meeting as the Canadian representative, and
> unfortunately the above is a little optimistic.

It wasn't completely wishful thinking - I remain very optimistic 
despit what went on in Seattle. 

> 	It is my understanding (I'm not completely sure on all this), that
> if there are more than 2 negative votes internationally then the ISO will NOT
> adopt the Ansi draft as the international standard (ie, they vote by a form
> of modified consensus).  In that case, the standards will be different OR
> there will not be an ISO standard.

That's how Plauger explained it to me. It is extremely likely that X3 
will accept the draft ANSI standard as is within about 3 months. Once 
that happens, ISO are out on a limb in terms of having something 
different. Then THEY have to do the extra technical work needed to 
make a different ISO standard. If the two differ, it is still possible 
(likely?) that US Govt. validation will be based on ANSI only since 
the ISO extensions are not needed for US govt purposes.

Rex

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rex Jaeschke     | C Users Journal     |  Journal of C Language Translation
(703) 860-0091   | DEC PROFESSIONAL    |1810 Michael Faraday Drive, Suite 101
uunet!aussie!rex | Programmers Journal |     Reston, Virginia 22090, USA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------