Re: Four questions on ISO/IEC/IEEE 60559:2011 relative to IEEE Std 754-2008
From: Charles Stevens <charles.stevens@xxxxxxxx>
To: IEEE 754 <stds-754@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Four questions on ISO/IEC/IEEE 60559:2011 relative to IEEE Std
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 21:11:44 -0600
These questions stem from the fact that the proposed COBOL standard under (=
what we hope is the final stage of) development references IEEE Std 754-200=
8 in normative text.
I've been informed that ISO/IEC/IEEE 60559 has been approved for publicatio=
n=3B the ISO website=2C however=2C indicates that it's at stage "50:60"=2C =
which indicates "Close of voting. Proof returned by secretariat". What I =
would have expected is that it reached "50:99"=2C "FDIS approved for public=
ation" a couple of months ago=2C and should already bee at stage "60:00"=2C=
"International Standard under publication".
1) Are the specifications in ISO/IEC/IEEE 60559:2011 and IEEE Std 754-2008=
word-for word=2C and section-for-section=2C identical?
2) If they are not the same=2C what are the differences?
From what I have seen they prepended some leagalese
to our document & copied the rest from our source.
They were not authorized to make technical changes.
There WERE authorized to reject it for technical
reasons but that hurdle has been passed & it has
3) What's the "real" stage of publication? When is it expected that it wi=
ll reach "60:60"=2C "Standard published"?
I have no idea what that notation means to the ISO.
Anybody else? Bob, perhaps? Jodi? Malia?
4) Has the FULLl=2C "normatively-referenceable" title of what I think will=
be "ISO/IEC/IEEE 60559:2011" in "shorthand"=2C been decided? If so=2C Wha=
t will it be?
Sounds like the right reference to me.
Since the COBOL standard is an ISO standard=2C if we're referencing another=
standard (as we are here) that has both "ISO" and "other" versions=2C we n=
eed to be able to reference the ISO version=2C but there's concern that we =
can't do so if it hasn't actually been PUBLISHED by the time we enter stage=
"50:00"=2C "FDIS registered for formal approval"=2C for the COBOL standard=
If there aren't "solid" answers in the IEEE 754 group for this=2C where sho=
uld I go next?
Thanks for any help on this!
-Chuck Stevens =
If that is not enough for you the right people
from the IEEE are listening in. They should be
able to get you more authoritative answers.