[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

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
        been accepted.

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.

        Good luck,


754 | revision | FAQ | references | list archive