Prepared 22 June, Currie Colket, Meeting Secretary
In general, these minutes were created by making appropriate insertions into the detailed agenda of the meeting, N358. In cases where the inclusion is not obvious, the insertions carry the subtitle "Minutes."
The announcement and draft agenda for this meeting were originally circulated as N357.
The 36th meeting of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG9 will be hosted by the national body of Spain, in conjunction with the 1999 Ada-Europe conference. The meeting will begin at 9:00 am and is expected to conclude by 4:00 pm. It will be conducted in the "Saray" room of the conference hotel. I expectthat an overhead projector will be available for our use. Our hosts planto provide coffee. The conference organizers advise that the best hotel rate can be obtained by making reservations through the conference web site. For information, consult the web site:
http://www.ada-europe.org/conference99.html
The meeting will begin at 9:00 am.
The meeting was convened at 9:00 by James W. Moore, Convener.
Currie Colket has agreed to serve as meeting secretary.
Without objection, Colket was appointed as meeting secretary.
See Resolution 36-15.
The US asked that a discussion of the future of WG9 be added to the agenda. The convener added the item under new business.
Without objection, the agenda, as amended, was approved.
Dr. Michael González Harbour, the Chairman of Ada-Europe'99 welcomed WG9 to Santander, Spain and encouraged us to have a productive meeting. He was thanked for all his excellent support of our meeting.
Also see Resolution 36-14.
The draft minutes of meeting #35 appear in document N353.
Without objection, the minutes were approved.
[Agenda]
National Body Representatives:
WG9 Officers (if not already listed):
Those sending regrets include:
Steve Michell provided an oral report for the Canadian National Body:
Canada is an active Ada participant.
From Jean-Pierre Rosen, 28 May 1999:
The Ada group of AFNOR is currently dormant due to lack of financial support.
AFNOR regulations require participants to WG to pay a fee for their participation; this policy is based on the assumption that members participate to support their companies' interests in the standardization process, but is clearly not appropriate for the Ada group where members are mainly dedicated volunteers with no vested interests. Note that this is quitegeneral in programming language groups, and that other similar WG have exactly the same troubles.
The alternative would be to get financial support from sponsors, but despite many efforts, we were unable to get support from any French company.
Unless some last minute support shows up, the group is likely to be closed by the end of June.
Should this happen, this would be my last report as chair from AFNOR Ada WG. Let me take this opportunity to thank the group as a whole, and especially the successive chairs, for the exciting and fruitful experienceof many years of working together. I wish you all good luck for your continuing endeavours.
Erhard Ploedereder provided an oral report for the German NationalBody:
The Ada-Germany conference, "Objektorientierung und sichere Software mit Ada", took place from 21-22 April 1999 in Karlsruhe, Germany. Theconference was well attended with approximately 80 participants.
From Kiyoshi Ishihata, 17 April 1999:
A plan to publish a JIS standard of Ada 95 has been approved. We must prepare a draft standard by the end of March 2000.
Due to lack of human resource, we will not translate whole ARM into Japanese. Certain parts of ARM such as Introduction, Chapter 1, and a few more will be translated.
From John Barnes, 12 May 1999:
A meeting of the BSI group concerning Ada was held in May. There was general approval of progress with the Corrigendum. However, concern was expressed that pragmas such as Unchecked_Union might be abused.
The general feeling regarding SameDL was that the existing standard was probably no longer relevant. However it was felt that there ought to be a recognized route from Ada 95 to SQL (and SQL99 at that) possibly via some other language such as Java.
The UK is as ever concerned about free availability of standards. Thequestion of free electronic publication has arisen. The UK wishes to know whether WG9 feels that all SC22 standards should be freely available inelectronic form. (The background is that the BSI is proposing to make standards electronically available only to those who pay a (not insignificant) fee.) [New business agenda item - Free electronic publication.]
[Agenda]
Clyde Roby continues his fine work in maintaining WG9's web page at http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg9/
The Ada Conformity Assessment standard has progressed rapidly. The need for this standard became apparent in June 1998. By September 1998, a New Work Item proposal and an initial Working Draft were presented to SC22 for their endorsement. JTC1 approved the New Work Item in December 1998 and WG9 approved the Working Draft in January 1999. Within ten days, the edited draft and the disposition report were forwarded to SC22 for concurrent CD registration and FCD approval. At this meeting, we expect to approve the disposition of comments from the FCD ballot and authorize the editor to forward the document to JTC1 for FDIS approval.
Even ISO Central Secretariat is participating in the acceleration of the document. At the direction of Keith Brannon, John Spangler of the Secretariat provided pre-publication comments on FCD 18009 concurrent with the FCD ballot. Normally, ISO Central Secretariat does not provide these comments until an FDIS draft is offered. Avoiding the turn-around of a preliminary FDIS draft will save perhaps two months in gaining approval of the standard.
All considered, this may be the fastest moving standard in the history of JTC1.
The credit for moving this document so rapidly belongs to its editor,Erhard Ploedereder. We also appreciate the assistance of Phil Brashear, Randy Brukhardt, and Michael Tonndorf in preparing the standard. Kiyoshi Ishihata has been very helpful in performing editorial review of the FCD and FDIS text.
I am pleased to have seen a number of articles regarding the work of WG9 in the March 1999 issue of SIGAda Ada Letters. Currie Colket providedtwo articles on the new ASIS standard, one of which was co-authored by Clyde Roby. Phil Brashear published an article on the transition to the Ada Conformity Assessment Standard, as did Randy Brukardt, Steve Deller andJoyce Tokar.
The convener added that all are encouraged to send WG9 related articles for publication in the SIGAda and/or Ada-Europe publications. Input for the SIGAda Ada Letters should be sent to Dr. KM George. Input for the Ada-Europe Ada User Journal should be sent to Dr. Jim Briggs or Dr. Michael González Harbour.
JTC1 has removed all obstacles to the open electronic publication of a Technical Corrigenda to the Ada language standard. JTC1 policy now allows all Technical Corrigenda to be made openly available on the Web.
The Final Draft International Standard for ASIS was approved by JTC1 and was published on 15 April 1999. Our aggressive strategies for progressing this work have succeeded in accelerating completion of this standardby perhaps a full year. Our congratulations go to the ASIS Team, notablyCurrie Colket (chair of the ASIS RG), and Steve Blake and Clyde Roby (the project editors).
The Preliminary Draft Technical Report of this document was approved by SC22. The HRG, led by Alan Burns and project editor Brian Wichmann, ispreparing a disposition of comments and a Draft Technical Report for submission to ballot by JTC1. I anticipate that this meeting will approve the new draft and the disposition of comments and forward them for the final round of balloting.
Our strategy of pursuing plenary registration of this work was successful in accelerating the progress of this work by perhaps four months.
Several nations have ceased active participation in the work of WG9 during recent years. We can expect that France will cease participation within a few months. By my count, this will leave us with five active participants: Canada, Germany, Japan, UK, USA. By the JTC1 directives, active participation by five nations is needed to pursue any new work item. Although this does not endanger the completion of our current work, nor the development of the Technical Corrigenda, it is clear that the prospects for future work, including language revision, is problematic.
[Agenda]
From convener: The schedule for meeting #37 was already adopted during the Washington, DC meeting of WG9. The schedule for meeting #38 is proposed:
[Agenda]
From Convener: This is the "To Do" list for WG9. Some are informal action items assigned to various participants. Some are formal resolutions which are not yet implemented. Some are suspense items awaiting action by other groups.
After resolution of the ISO copyright issue, determine a schedule forpreparation of a technical corrigenda to the Ada standard, ISO/IEC 8652.
Status: CLOSED. A request for relief from ISO copyright policy has been made, endorsed by SC22, endorsed by JTC1, and forwarded to ISO Central Secretariat for disposition. Following the 1998 JTC1 plenary meeting, the chair of SC22 is so confident of successful resolution of this issue that he has directed WG9 to begin preparing the CORR for online availability in accordance with SC22 N1236. Reassigned to Chair of ARG, 21October 1998. From Erhard Ploedereder, 21 October 1998. The ARG intends to commence the editorial work in 1999. A schedule for completion will be proposed to WG-9 at the first meeting in 1999. From Convener,31 May 1999: The ARG has tabled a schedule for consideration at the June 1999 meeting of WG9.
A schedule for the preparation of a technical corrigenda to the Ada standard was presented and approved [See Resolution 36-6].
ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG9 recommends to SC22 that the following standardsbe withdrawn when they reach the end of their five-year life. Both standards are relevant to the 1987 version of the Ada language standard ratherthan the current version.
Status: OPEN. This resolution has been reported to SC22 andendorsed at their plenary meeting in August 1998. As of 5 March 1999, the standards remain listed on the ISO web site: http://www.iso.ch.
Convener is directed to prepare and seek approval of a New Work Item proposal for the development of an Ada conformity assessment standard.
Status: CLOSED. The work item was approved by JTC1.
The ARG and the convener are directed to prepare a draft conformity assessment standard for email ballot by WG9.
Status: CLOSED. Email ballot by WG9 was completed 8 January1999.
Convener is authorized to pursue any methods for accelerating the progress of a conformity assessment standard, including: fast-track; concurrent balloting; SC22 plenary session balloting; and any other methods permitted by JTC1 directives.
Status: CLOSED.
The ARG is directed to prepare a draft of the conformity assessment standard for Working Group ballot; the convener is directed to conduct Working Group ballot via email; and the ARG is directed to dispose of comments from the Working Group ballot and prepare a draft for combined CD registration and FCD approval ballot.
Status: CLOSED. Email ballot by WG9 was completed 8 January1999.
[Agenda]
[Agenda]
From Convener's Report, 1 July 1998, N345:
Project 22.10.02 -- IS 11430:1994 Generic Package of Elementary Functions for Ada, Ken Dritz, editor
Project 22.10.03 -- IS 11729:1994 Generic Package of Primitive Functionsfor Ada, Ken Dritz, editor
The contents of 11430 and 11729 are substantively subsumed by the subsequent approval of the 1995 revision of 8652. WG9 has requested that these standards be withdrawn at the conclusion of their five-year review period.
From Plenary Meeting Report of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22, 24-28 August 1998, N351:
Resolution 98-Q: Standards for Periodic Review -- ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC22=2E.. recommends that the following standards be withdrawn:
From Ken Dritz, 5 March 1999: As has been the case all along, there is nothing to report about IS 11430 and IS 11729. I have not been involved in, or aware of, any action (or even interest) related to them.
[Agenda]
From Convener's Report, 1 July 1998, N345:
Project 22.35 -- (Type 2) TR 11735:1996 EXTensions for real-time Ada, Nasser Kettani, Editor
The contents of 11735 are substantively subsumed by the 1995 revision of8652. This Technical Report will be withdrawn when usage of the 1987 version of the Ada language has diminished.
[Agenda]
From Convener's Report, 1 July 1998, N345:
Project 22.31 -- IS 12227:1995 SQL/Ada Module Description Language (SAMeDL), Andreas Koeller, editor
WG9 has determined that the revision of 12227 is currently unnecessary; this decision will be reconsidered periodically.
From Convener, 5 March 1999: Because ISO/IEC 12227, SAMeDL, was completed in 1995, its five-year review date falls in the year 2000. Atits September 1999 plenary, SC22 will have to take a position on the future of this standard. Therefore, at our June 1999 meeting, we should makea recommendation to SC22. We have three choices:
In my initial draft of the resolutions for the meeting, I have included a resolution to withdraw the standard. This is based upon my belief that there is little, if any, commercial support for the standard and the fact that the standard is premised upon Ada 87.
[Agenda]
From Convener's Report, 1 July 1998, N345:
Project 22.10.04 -- DIS 13813 Generic packages of real and complex type declarations and basic operations for Ada (including vector and matrix types), Don Sando and Ken Dritz, editors
From Convener: Published in 1998.
From Don Sando, 10 May 1999: There has been no activity or inquiries with respect to IS 13813 since the last WG9 meeting.
[Agenda]
From Convener's Report, 1 July 1998, N345:
Project 22.10.05 -- DIS 13814 Generic package of complex elementary functions for Ada, Jon Squire and Ken Dritz, editors
From Convener: Published in 1998.
[Agenda]
From WG9 Web Site:
ISO/IEC 8652:1995 Information Technology--Programming Languages--Ada
22.10.01, Randy Brukardt and Erhard Ploedereder, Project Editors
From Erhard Ploedereder, 22 May 1999:
The ARG met in Burlington, MA, 24-26 March 1999.
Apart from discussing and resolving a number of AIs, the ARG decided on a general layout of the Technical Corrigendum and on a tentative timetable for its production.
The layout of the TC will contain the specific wording changes to theISO standard on a section by section basis, cross-referenced to an accompanying Defect Reports document. The latter will be a compendium of the respective AIs, basically in the style that was used for publishing the AIs in Ada Letters last year.
The timetable for the TC is the following:
In order to adhere to this schedule, AIs that have not been WG-9 approved by this meeting (June 1999) are most unlikely to make it into the TC.
The ARG also resolved to get involved in the production of ACATS tests for approved binding interpretations.
From Erhard Ploedereder, 28 April 1999:
The ARG has its "usual" motion for the June meeting for approval of a series of AIs. A WWW-pointer to retrieve the AIs is included.
(Most of these AIs are still in editorial review by the ARG, which will end in May. Any AIs needing major repairs after this review will, as always, be deleted from the motion at the meeting. Editorial comments by WG9 are very welcome and are to be sent to [email protected].)
The cited AIs can be retrieved as a single file from http://pebbles.ocysystems.com/~acats/ai-files/ARG_AIS.ZIP in zip form and http://pebbles.ocysystems.com/~acats/ai-files/arg_ais.tar in tar form.
During discussion, AI-147 and AI-197 were deleted from the list originally proposed. Also the vote tally for AI-160, 9-0-1, was added. The resulting motion is as shown in Resolution 36-7.
[Agenda]
Action Item 31-8 [Convener]: After resolution of the ISO copyright issue, determine a schedule for preparation of a technical corrigenda to the Ada standard, ISO/IEC 8652.
Status: OPEN. A request for relief from ISO copyright policy has been made, endorsed by SC22, endorsed by JTC1, and forwarded to ISO Central Secretariat for disposition. Following the 1998 JTC1 plenary meeting, the chair of SC22 is so confident of successful resolutionof this issue that he has directed WG9 to begin preparing the CORR for online availability in accordance withSC22 N1236. Reassigned toChair of ARG, 21 October 1998. From Erhard Ploedereder, 21 October 1998. The ARG intends to commence the editorial work in 1999. A schedule for completion will be proposed to WG-9 at the first meeting in 1999=2E
From SC22 Secretariat, 27 April 1999 [regarding procedures for progressing the CORR]:
You don't need an NP and, unless you are changing project editors, you don't need anything other blessing from SC22 or JTC 1.
Having notified me and assuming that the project editors for the Technical Corrigenda will be the same as for the revised 8652 (i.e., Ploedereder and Brukardt), WG9 can proceed to develop it. If you are changing project editors, SC22 will have to approve the new one(s).
Otherwise, there is nothing here [that] requires SC22 approval until the Technical Corrigenda is ready for ballot.
It will be developed as part of Project JTC 1.22.10.01.
[See report of ISO/IEC 8652.]
During discussion, the wording of the proposed resolutions were altered slightly to read as shown in the final resolutions.
It was noted that a National Body must officially submit a Defect Report to SC22. So far, no formal Defect Report has been submitted.
[Resolution 36-4] [Resolution36-5] [Resolution 36-6]
[Agenda]
From Convener: The New Work Item Proposal (NP) is contained inN347. The preliminary working draft attached to the proposal is N348. NBs who agreed to participate are Canada, Germany, Japan, UK, and the US. JTC1 approval is expected by mid-January 1999.
From Plenary Meeting Report of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22, 24-28 August 1998, N351:
From Convener, 8 January 1999:
WD 18009 was approved by WG9.From SC22 N 2876, 19 January 1999:
FCD 18009, Information technology - Programming languages - Ada:Conformity Assessment of a Language Processor, was distributed for a four-month concurrent CD registration and FCD ballot.
From Erhard Ploedereder, 24 April 1999: I received the comments from John Spangler (of ISO Central Secretariat) on the Conformity FCD. [Note--ISO Central Secretariat is cooperating with us to accelerate the document. Normally, they review documents and provide comments after the FDIS draft is submitted.--jwm]
From Convener, 31 May 1999: Attached is the draft Disposition of Comments on FCD 18009, the Ada Conformity Assessment Standard. At the June meeting, I will entertain a procedural motion to approve the document and forward it to SC22 Secretariat.
From Convener, 31 May 1999: Attached is the Draft of FDIS 18009, the Ada Conformity Assessment standard. At the June meeting, I will entertain a procedural motion to forward it to SC22 Secretariat for FDIS ballot at the JTC1 level. ... The FCD ballot for 18009 was approved with 14"P" members voting in favor and none opposed. Valuable comments were provided by Japan and the US.
From Convener:
Because the Project Editor has prepared a Disposition of Comments for the FCD ballot and has accordingly revised the draft, the appropriate next step is for WG9 to approve the progress of thedocument to the FDIS stage. The technical aspects of comment dispositionwere approved by the ARG. WG9's responsibility is to provide procedural approval.From Plenary Meeting Report of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22, 24-28 August 1998, N351:
Conveners are routinely required to provide schedules for all of theprojects. Jim Moore provided the following schedule. Updates are shown in parentheses:
|
Name |
CD (or PDTR) submitted for ballot |
FDIS (or DTR) submitted for ballot |
IS submitted for publication |
|
|
NP |
Conformity Assessment |
(1/99*) Actual |
6/99* |
10/99* |
|
* These dates have been revised from those appearing in the referenced document. The 1/99 date is immediately after JTC1 approves the NWI. The6/99 date is after approval of the Disposition of Comments; the final text should be available in June 1999. |
||||
[Agenda]
From Convener's Report, 1 July 1998, N345:
Project 22.15291-- FCD 15291 Ada Semantic Interface Specification (ASIS), Clyde Roby and Steve Blake, editors
From Plenary Meeting Report of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22, 24-28 August 1998, N351:
Conveners are routinely required to provide schedules for all of theprojects. Jim Moore provided the following schedules. Updates are shown in parentheses:
|
Project |
Name |
CD (or PDTR) submitted for ballot |
FDIS (or DTR) submitted for ballot |
IS submitted for publication |
|
15291 |
ASIS |
Done |
Done |
(3/99) Actual |
From Currie Colket, 14 May 1999:
Wonderful News! The ASIS Standard has now been published by ISO and is available. The name of the new standard is:
ISO/IEC 15291:1999, Information technology - Programming languages - AdaSemantic Interface Specification (ASIS)
The ASIS Standard is available via the ISO Catalog at http://www.iso.ch/infoe/catinfo.html; the ASIS specific reference is located at http://www.iso.ch/cate/d27169.html.
The Final Draft International Standard (FDIS) Ballot on ASIS was approved on 8 December 1998. Twenty-three Nations voted to approve ASIS as anInternational Standard (there were 0 nations voting for disapproval and 7 nations abstained). The publication date of the ASIS Standard is May 1999.
There are a number of talented people who have worked very hard to get ASIS to where it is today. We are indebted to the ASIS Working Group (ASISWG) and ASIS Rapporteur Group (ASISRG) members who spent many hours evolving an ASIS for Ada 83 to an ASIS for Ada 95. We are indebted to the work of the National reviewers who provided excellent comments, which haveresulted in a significantly improved ASIS specification for the Ada community. We are indebted to the many who helped resolve these issues. We are indebted to those in SC22 and ISO who worked close with us for standardization. These creators, reviewers, resolvers and facilitators included: Cheryl Barbasch, Gary Barnes, John Barnes, Bill Beckwith, Roy Bell, Jim Bladen, Steve Blake, Alex Blakemore, Keith Brannon, David Brookman, Ben Brosgol, Gary Bundy, Vincent Celier, Dave Clark, Richard Conn, Dan Cooper, John Dawes, Robert Dewar, Bill Eastman, Bob Ekman, Dan Ehrenfried, Dan Eilers, Magnus Ericson, Arthur Evans, Dan Fisher, Herm Fischer, Vasily Fofanov, Mark Gerhardt, Wesley Hair, Hal Hart, Peter Hermann, Chuck Hobin, Maretta Holden, Bob Hokanson, Rick Hudson, Kiyoshi Ishihata, Jesper Joergensen, Bjorn Kallberg, Magnus Kempe, Allan Kopp, Alexei Kuchumov, Alain Le Guennec, Janusz Laski, Robert Leif, Pascal Leroy, Jim Longers, Ole Oest, Stefan Landherr, Bob Mathis, Steve Michell, Jim Moore, Peter Obermayer, Bertrand Petitprez, Michael Pickett, Erhard Ploedereder, Ron Price, Gil Prine, Bill Pritchett, Bill Rinehuls, Dan Rittersdorf, Clyde Roby, Sergey Rybin, Tom Shields, Steen Silberg, John Solomond, John Spangler, David Spenhoff, Doug Smith, Tom Strelich, Alfred Strohmeier, Joyce Tokar, Bill Thomas, Kevin Tucker, Luba Vladavsky, Mickey White, Brian Wichmann, John Wiley, Steve Ziegler, Eugene Zueff, and many others.
A very, very special thanks to those who served in key positions in making ASIS happen these folks are: Currie Colket (ASISWG Chair/ASISRG Chair), Dr. Tom Shields (first ASISWG Chair), Steve Blake (ASISWG Vice Chair; ASISRG Co-Editor), Clyde Roby (ASISWG Recorder; ASISRG Co-Editor), Dan Cooper (ASISWG Vice-Recorder), Dr. Bill Thomas (ASISWG Vice Chair for Publicity/Meetings), Gary Barnes (ASISWG Archivist), Cheryl Barbasch (ActiveMember), Dr. Robert Dewar (Active member), Jesper Joergensen (Active Member), Dan Rittersdorf (Active Lurker), Dr. Sergey Rybin (Active Member), Steen Silberg (Active Member), Professor Alfred Strohmeier (Active Member), and Dr. Joyce Tokar (Active Member). Several monumental efforts shouldbe recognized: Gary Barnes, Steve Blake, Sergey Rybin and Joyce Tokar rapidly brought ASIS into the Rational, AONIX, DDC-I, and ACT environments.The development of these ASIS implementations by different vendors concurrent with the development of the ASIS specification was vitally important to the standardization of ASIS. The efforts of Dan Cooper, Dan Rittersdorf, and Bill Thomas in addressing issues from the user perspective is particularly noteworthy. Clyde Roby and Steve Blake did a fantastic job as technical editors. A very special thanks goes to Clyde Roby who is truly a wizard at generating a large technical document and making the World Wide Web effective for the dissemination of ASIS information via the ASIS Home Page. His work in providing ASIS and the Resolution of Editorial and Technical Comments on the ASIS Home Page was vital to the success of ASIS. I would like to thank Professor Richard Conn for insuring the latest ASIS versions have been on the Public Ada Library (PAL) CD-ROMs. And yes, avery special thanks goes to Dan Ehrenfried whose idea for the LRM interfaces in the 1980s mushroomed into ASIS.
As the ASIS interface has been a totally volunteer effort since 1989,ASIS happened because a number of key organizations recognized the valueof cooperation and committed their resources to benefit the entire Ada community. These key organizations are: ACT, Ada_Med, Aonix, Boeing, CACI,Celsius Tech Naval Systems, Concurrent Computer Corporation, DCS Corporation, DDC-I, Defense Science and Technology Organization, EDS, GRC, Hughes Aircraft, IDA, Intermetrics, Irvine Compiler Corporation, Little Tree Consulting, Lockheed-Martin, Magnavox, Mark V Systems, Maurya Software, Meiji University, MITRE, Moscow State University, National Physical Laboratory, New York University, Oakland University, Objective Interface Systems, Odyssey Research Associates, Peregrine Systems, Praxis Critical Systems, Rational Software, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Texas Instruments, UNISYS, Universitaet Stuttgart, Uppsala University, U.S. Air Force,and the U.S. Navy.
A special thanks goes the Ada Joint Program Office (specially Dr. John Solomond and Dr. Charles Engle), the WG9 convenors (Mr. James Moore andDr. Robert Mathis), the ACM SIGAda chairs (specially Mr. Mark Gerhardt, Mr. Hal Hart and Mr. Ben Brosgol), and the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR) (specially Mr. Phillip Andrews and Mr. Carl Andriani),who recognized the code analysis value of ASIS to assess the quality of software for mission-critical and safety-critical applications, and consequently encouraged my participation on this very important interface.
It was a distinct pleasure of mine to work with a highly professionaland cooperative team dedicated to producing a powerful interface to the Ada compilation environment. Thank you all for producing a product which will benefit the entire Ada community.
[Agenda]
From Convener's Report, 1 July 1998, N345:
Project 22.15942 -- WD 15942 Guidance for the use of the Ada ProgrammingLanguage in High Integrity Systems, Brian Wichmann, Editor
From Convener: The PDTR ballot on 15942 closed on 8 March 1999. Twelve "P" members voted in favor; one voted against. The project editor, supported by the HRG began comment disposition.
From Convener:
Because the Project Editor has prepared a Disposition of Comments for the PDTR ballot and has accordingly revised the draft, the appropriate next step is for WG9 to approve the progress of the document to the DTR stage. The technical aspects of comment disposition were approved by the HRG. WG9's responsibility is to provide procedural approval.From Plenary Meeting Report of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22, 24-28 August 1998, N351:
Conveners are routinely required to provide schedules for all of theprojects. Jim Moore provided the following schedules. Updates with actual dates accomplished are shown in parentheses:
|
Project |
Name |
CD (or PDTR) submitted for ballot |
FDIS (or DTR) submitted for ballot |
IS submitted for publication |
|
15942 |
High Integrity |
(11/98) Actual |
10/99 |
10/2000 |
From Brian Wichmann, 13 May 1999
Project Editor's Report to WG9
As you are aware, the result of the PDTR ballot on TR 15942 was 12 infavour and one against (Canada). The Canadian 'no' vote provided some detailed comments.
The initial reaction by some to the ballot was to propose an HRG meeting to resolve the issues raised by Canada. However, the consensus from HRG was that the TR should be published as soon as possible and hence the timing required that a response was prepared for the June WG9 meeting. This made the logistics in arranging a meeting impractical and hence a e-mail debate was undertaken with the Editor preparing a sequence of draft responses.
The e-mail process worked very effectively with Steve Michell providing many suggested wordings for the individual issues raised. As a result,many examples of poor wording and lack of clarity were revised in the draft response. The Editor therefore believes that the new draft is a significant improvement and has no hesitation in recommending its formal approval by WG9.
[snip]
Finally, the Editor would like to thank all the members of the HRG for their active support.
The following report from Brian Wichmann was not included in the Detailed Agenda and was read by the convener:
Steve Michell has pointed out to me that Issue 49 of the Canadiancomments is resolved by a straightforward change to the text:
49. Section 5.12.2 Note 5: The "Alld" rating for raising user exceptions under FA and SA is not justified by the note. This should probably be"Inc". Similarly for handlers for user-defined exceptions.
Replace the note by: "Raise statements from deeply nested scopes can be obscure and cause difficulties for Flow Analysis and Object Code Analysis."
However, this change was not made by me to the revised TR 15942 due to an oversight. Apologies. I hope if you don't mind me not re-issuing theTR, since the omission is straightforward.
For those that check the small print, the revised TR does have an error on the last page. Second line of first column reads 'No_Access_Subprogramms'. I did actually correct this error in the main text, but forgot toget Word to recompute the index. (I have to do that explicitly, otherwise the page numbers are incorrect.)
[Agenda]
The following item was received too late for distribution in the detailed agenda and was read by the convener:
As to Java standardization. I don't have anything official yet, but if Sun submits Java to ECMA they will set up a Technical working group. I expect that group will meet during the Fall and submit the standard to the ECMA council for voting at their December meeting. The standard would then be submitted to JTC1 for Fast Track balloting. This is the same procedure followed by ECMAScript (JavaScript). I expect that I will have aliaison role between SC22 and ECMA and that the JSG will have an advisory and commenting role as it did with ECMAScript. Any member of WG9 who wants to have more information or input into the process is welcome to contact me directly.
[Agenda]
The convener knows of no unfinished business.
[Agenda]
Excerpt from UK National Body Report: The UK is as ever concerned about free availability of standards. The question of free electronic publication has arisen. The UK wishes to know whether WG9 feels that all SC22 standards should be freely available in electronic form. (The background is that the BSI is proposing tomake standards electronically available only to those who pay a (not insignificant) fee.)
WG9 believes that it is in the best interests of the community if standards be made as freely available as possible. Standards ultimately benefit society as a whole through cheaper manufacturing and integration costs=2E Disincentives to use standards should be minimized wherever possible; in particular, the distribution of standards should be charged for at cost at most.
Whereas paper copies involve the originating organization in significant production and distribution costs to which it is appropriate that therecipient should contribute, electronic distribution is of a different nature since the costs of printing and distribution are borne by the recipient by the very nature of the mechanism. WG9 concludes that approved standards published on the World Wide Web should be in an open form which can be freely accessed without charge.
During discussion, the proposed resolution was amended to read as shown in the list of final resolutions.
[Agenda]
The US Delegate raised the issue of the Future of WG9. Currently we only have 5 active members. In the United States, there is a high cost of participation, which is normally borne by a volunteer.
WG9 identified future work and reaffirmed its importance to the Ada community. Future work includes:
Only member national bodies are permitted to attend the WG9 meetings.Liaison bodies can also attend. However, JTC1 prohibits representation from outside groups. One issue is the high cost of individual participation in a national body TAG. In the US, the cost is $300. This is prohibitive for most individuals. Other models might be desirable. Submitters of NWIs could be required to support the financing so volunteers would not have to pay. Perhaps JTC1 could have multiple models. Perhaps one model might allow WG to pay up front and have documents distributed electronically for free.
A straw poll was taken addressing the value of keeping WG9 in place. In principle, each national body emphasized the importance of the WG9 work but recognized that we need to work harder to secure national body appreciation and support. WG9 is an international organization and we would like to strongly encourage more participation from the international community.
Action Item 36-A [Convener]: Suggest ways in which additional national bodies might be added to WG9. For example, determine if membership in SC22 is required. Determine if "C" liaisons count for the purposes of determining support. Determine how NBs like Russia could be included. Determine how to seek support from other nations. Discuss these problems with other WGs in SC22.
The following resolutions were all approved without objection except as noted:
WG9 approves the Disposition of Comments for FCD 18009 contained in N361; the project editor is authorized to submit thedocument to the SC22 Secretariat. The draft of FDIS 18009 contained in N362 is approved; the project editor is authorized to submit the document to the SC22 Secretariat for FDIS balloting. WG9 approves progressing the project to the FDIS stage.
Approved 5-0-0.
[Agenda] [Discussion]
WG9 approves the Disposition of Comments for PDTR 15942 contained in N360 ; the project editor is authorized to submit the document to the SC22 Secretariat. The draft of DTR 15942 contained in N359, with additional corrections as outlined in Brian Wichmann's email note of 20 May, is approved; the project editor is authorized to submit the document to the SC22 Secretariat for DTR balloting=2E WG9 approves progressing the project to the DTR stage.
Approved 5-0-0.
[Agenda] [Discussion]
ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG9 recommends to SC22 that the following standard be withdrawn when it reaches the end of its five-year life. The standard is relevant to the 1987 version of the Ada language standard rather than the current version:
[Agenda] [Discussion]
WG9 recognizes that the normal five-year period for initiating revision of ISO/IEC 8652 lapses during the year 2000. In the judgment of WG9, the interests of the Ada community are best served by developing a Technical Corrigenda document rather than by revising the standard. Accordingly,JTC1/SC22/WG9 requests the concurrence of SC22 and JTC1 in confirming the current standard, ISO/IEC 8652:1995, and in scheduling the next periodic review of that standard for the year 2005.
[Agenda] [Discussion]
WG9 resolves that the layout of the planned Technical Corrigenda to ISO/IEC 8652 will contain the specific wording changes to the standard on a sub-clause by sub-clause basis, cross-referenced to an accompanying Defect Report [Disposition] document. The latter will be a compendium of therespective AIs, basically in the style that was used for publishing the AIs in Ada Letters during 1998.
[Agenda] [Discussion]
WG9 adopts the following timetable for the production of the Technical Corrigenda to ISO/IEC 8652:
with status to be reported at WG9 meetings.
[Agenda] [Discussion]
Motion: To approve the following AIs, which have previously been approved by the ARG:
Approved 5-0-0.
[Agenda] [Discussion]
The minutes of Meeting #35 as contained in document N353 are approved.
[Discussion] [Agenda]
Meetings #38 of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG9 is scheduled as follows:
[Discussion] [Agenda]
ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG9 continues the following Rapporteur Groups untilthe next plenary meeting and expresses its grateful appreciation to their chairs for their continuing service:
The convener is directed to include the following resolution in his report at the SC22 plenary:
WG9 believes that it is in the best interests of the community if standards be made as freely available as possible. Standards ultimately benefit society as a whole through cheaper manufacturing and integration costs. Disincentives to use standards should be minimized wherever possible=2E
Whereas paper copies involve the originating organization in significant production and distribution costs to which it is appropriate that therecipient should contribute, electronic distribution is of a different nature since the costs of printing and distribution are borne by the recipient by the very nature of the mechanism.
WG9 concludes that approved standards should be published on the World Wide Web permitting access at no cost or a substantially reduced cost, perhaps subsidized by alternative funding models.
The convener might mention alternative models such as these:
The convener is directed to invite additional suggestions from WG9.
[Agenda] [Discussion]
For the rapid progress of project 22.18009, WG9 extends its grateful appreciation and congratulations to its editor, Erhard Ploedereder, to the ad hoc document review group of Philip Brashear, Randall Brukardt and Michael Tonndorf, to the membership of the ARG, notably Kiyoshi Ishihata, and to the WG9 Convener, James Moore.
[Discussion] [Agenda]
WG9 congratulates Currie Colket, Clyde Roby and Steve Blake upon the publication of International Standard ISO/IEC 15291:1999, Information technology - Programming languages - Ada Semantic Interface Specification (ASIS).
WG9 also thanks members of the ASIS Rapporteur Group and ACM SIGAda ASIS Working Group who made ASIS possible. The key contributors were: Cheryl Barbasch, Gary Barnes, Professor Richard Conn, Dan Cooper, Dr. Robert Dewar, Dan Ehrenfried, Vasily Fofanov, Jesper Joergensen, Allan Kopp, RonPrice, Dan Rittersdorf, Dr. Sergey Rybin, Dr. Tom Shields, Steen Silberg, Professor Alfred Strohmeier, Dr. Bill Thomas, and Dr. Joyce Tokar. Manyothers are acknowledged on the ASIS Home Page at the http://www.acm.org/sigada/WG/asiswg/ URL=2E
[Agenda] [Discussion]
WG9 expresses its gratitude to Dr. Michael González Harbour, to Ada-Europe and to the National Body of Spain for their gracious accommodations in hosting Meeting #36.
[Agenda]
ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG9 expresses its grateful appreciation to Currie Colket for serving as secretary of Meeting #36.
[Agenda]
ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG9 expresses its grateful appreciation to Clyde Roby for maintaining the WG9 Web Page.
[Agenda]
In addtion to the resolutions approved at this meeting, the followingaction items and unimplemented resolutions are carried forward from previous meetings (with status as shown) or assigned new at the current meeting:
ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG9 recommends to SC22 that the following standardsbe withdrawn when they reach the end of their five-year life. Both standards are relevant to the 1987 version of the Ada language standard ratherthan the current version.
Status: OPEN. This resolution has been reported to SC22 andendorsed at their plenary meeting in August 1998. As of 5 March 1999, the standards remain listed on the ISO web site: http://www.iso.ch.
[Convener]: Suggest ways in which additional national bodies might beadded to WG9. For example, determine if membership in SC22 is required. Determine if "C" liaisons count for the purposes of determining support. Determine how NBs like Russia could be included. Determine how to seek support from other nations. Discuss these problems with other WGs in SC22.
The meeting is planned to adjourn at approximately 4:30 PM.
The meeting was adjourned 1:00 pm.
[Agenda]
These attachments are available on the WG9 Web site at http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg9/documents.htm.
[Agenda]
End of Document