P754 Ballot Response message from valid local sender)

[Michel Hack (1-914-784-7648) <hack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I really hope we can close this one out -- and I hope that the low
completion rate is simply because the remaining ballot members are
carefully working out their responses to be submitted near the end
of the balloting period.

What I avoided this time was suggestions that would force a rewrite
of large sections of the document, because the document really is in
pretty good shape.   In that light, my main objection to a rewrite of
chapter 3, and sorting out the consequences throughout the document,
is precisely that.  It took a lot of work to get it into shape, and
now is not the time to tinker with it.  For example, I was tempted to
object to the inclusion of "extendable" formats, and more specifically
to the lack of clarity in the distinction between "extended" and
"extendable" formats, but I let it go as the section was reasonably
well written, and I did not want to mess with it.

Upon rereading Bob Davis' suggested replacement for clause 3.1 I see
that one reading of it suggests requiring the interface formats
mentioned in 3.4 and 3.5 support arithmetic (if supported at all),
which really makes me wonder what was meant by "widely available".
The justification for this is rather weak however, as Bob also thinks
that arithmetic should be carried out in wider formats anyway (but
presumably explicitly, by casting operands to wider formats, or by
relying on a language's widenTo rules.)  Given this, I think we should
leave the section alone.

Michel.
Sent: 2007-11-08 13:43:59 UTC