Standards Update, POSIX.0: POSIX Guide

Path: gmd.de!newsserver.jvnc.net!howland.reston.ans.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!
uunet!not-for-mail
From: n...@usenix.org (Nicholas M. Stoughton)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Standards Update, POSIX.0: POSIX Guide
Date: 29 Apr 1993 10:43:41 -0700
Organization: USENIX
Lines: 70
Sender: s...@ftp.UU.NET
Approved: s...@ftp.uucp (Moderator, Sean Eric Fagan)
Message-ID: <1rp44dINNp95@ftp.UU.NET>
Reply-To: std-u...@uunet.uu.net
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.uu.net
X-Submissions: std-u...@uunet.uu.net

Submitted-by: n...@usenix.org (Nicholas M. Stoughton)

               USENIX Standards Report

   Nicholas M. Stoughton < n...@usenix.org>, Report Editor


POSIX.0: POSIX Guide


Kevin Lewis < kle...@gucci.ent.dec.com> reports on the April
19-23, 1993 meeting in Irvine, Ca.:

Let me say right up front that this was quite a productive
week for the group. Our primary goal was to achieve in
excess of 75% in our affirmative ballots so as to move into
recirculation prior to the next meeting in July.  The group
was successful in achieving this goal. The chronology is as
follows:

   + initial number of affirmative ballots received was 28
     out of 58, placing the percent affirmative at 48%

   + the group converted 7 ballots to affirmative prior to
     the April meeting

   + the group converted 13 ballots to affirmative during
     the April meeting

   + this places the current percent affirmative at 82% (48
     out of 58)

The issue of public specifications, expected to be a highly
significant issue, proved to be exactly that for only a
small number of balloters (five out of 58, three of whom
could be considered negotiable).

The POSIX.0 group conducted a Birds-of-a-feather (BOF)
session on this issue of public specifications to ensure
that any balloter and any one else with a concern in this
area had an opportunity have a dialogue with Dot Zero to
ensure an effective exchange of information.  Our main
concern prior to this BOF was that the way POSIX.0 sees
public specs and their use and the way everyone else sees
this issue might be at odds.

It became evident after the BOF that the understanding on
this was mutual.  In fact, there were a very small number of
people (3 out of about 20 that attended) who had any major
concern with this topic.

The ISO WG15 Rapporteur and the SC22 Secretariat
representative were present during the BOF. I queried them
on whether or not there was any concern expressed on this
issue at their respective levels within ISO.  They both
indicated that each group was aware of the presence of this
topic in the POSIX.0 guide and no one had expressed any
concern.

Given that POSIX.0 has reached the goal enabling a
recirculation, this will be coordinated with the IEEE with
the objective of having this next phase start prior to the
July meeting in Denver.  The group will be in recirculation
during the July meeting. So our discussions will focus on
possible future projects, to include a guide in the area of
Transaction Processing and an IEEE video conference that
would serve as a tutorial about the use of the guide.


Volume-Number: Volume 31, Number 44