LIA is out for comments

[Peter Farkas]

   This is a reminder that the ISO/IEC 10967-1 Information Technology -
Language Independent Arithmetic - Part 1: Integer and Floating Point
Arithmetic is out for international voting.  The international voting
period will end March 30, 1994.  Concurrently, another U.S. public
review on LIA-1 is being held from 12 November 1993 to 11 January
1994.  X3T2 is responsible for determining the US position for ISO
voting.
   Comments received during this period should be considered by X3T2 in
formulating its recommendation on the international ballot.  This
public review is also part of the process of deciding whether the U.S.
should adopt the International Standard version of LIA-1 (assuming that
the DIS passes) as an American National Standard.
   This might be the last chance the public has a chance to influence
the content and/or life cycle of this prospective international
standard.  All interested parties should obtain a copy of the document,
and make their thoughts known.   Copies of the document can be obtained
by contacting ANSI, but should also be available from its editor, Craig
Schaffert, Digital Equipment Corp., Cambridge Research Lab, One Kendall
Sq. - Bldg. 700, Cambridge, MA 02139.
   Until better addresses are made public, comments should be sent to
 
   Deborah J. Greco
   ANSI
   1250 Eye Street NW, Suite 200
   Washington, DC 2005-3922
 
   John Sharp
   Sandia National Labs
   Information Arch Center
   PO Box 5800, Organization 4400
   Albuquerque, NM 87185-5800
 
   Maurice Smith
   Allied-Signal Corp
   D891-2A45
   PO Box 419159
   Kansas City, MO 64141-6159

Comments which are sent to ANSI for formal registration become formal
documents and have to be taken in consideration in formulating the US
position.
   I suggest that, in order for comments to be effective they should
differentiate between:
   * General comments, e.g. comments about the usefulness or fairness
of LIA, about its necessity.
   * Technical comments, e.g. requests for changes in the requirements,
or in the way requirements are formulated.  These are generally the
most effective ones, they actually make a difference in shaping the
proposed standard, especially when they come as specific change
proposals on the given text.
   * Comments about the goals and scope of LIA-1.  These include
comments on whether LIA-1 fulfills its stated goals and scope, and
whether LIA-1 is complying with the original project proposal (ISO
project JTC1.22.28).
   * Comments about the process of progressing LIA-1.  At this point
others might want to join me in objecting to the practice (in X3T2 and
WG11) of blindly voting yes on issues one did not become familiar with,
of the practice of labeling all changes to the text as "minor,
editorial changes", therefore not having to resubmit the document for
public scrutiny.  This is how LIA could be progressed from being a 2nd
Committee Draft to a Draft International Standard rather than a 3rd
Committee Draft, and another round of scrutiny through a public comment
period be avoided.  The people who sent in comments in the previous
public comment period might want to evaluate to what extent the current
LIA addresses/ignores their concerns.
   I have been Sun's representative to X3T2 and a member of the US
delegation to the WG11 meetings.  As such, I will recommend that the US
vote be "NO" to progressing LIA to becomming an International
Standard.  I will formulate this in an official letter within a couple
of weeks.  My points will be that: the changes made to the 2nd CD were
major changes, and as such, LIA should have gone out for a 3rd CD
rather than become a DIS; the public comments have not been properly
taken in account; the voting process at both the X3T2 and at the WG11
level are flawed, in the sense that most of the voting parties cast
uninformed votes.  I will make comments about LIA's compliance to the
original proposal and to its stated goals and scope.  And finally,
since there is a real possibility that LIA will become an International
Standard, I will make a number of specific proposals meant to improve
it.
                                           Peter Farkas
                                           SunPro