Two "bits" on Standards

1) In reply to one of the other threads and its talking about the "bureaucra
cy"
of the Standards groups, I do have to remind people here and elsewhere, that
these are the rules of ANSI and ISO - not of J4 or WG4.  Whether languages
SHOULD be under "their" control or not is another question (and certainly th
e
original COBOL specifications were NOT).  However, what works well for a 4-p
age
Standard on screw-sizes or 10-page Standard for a two-plug outlet, is probab
ly
NOT all that great for handling an 800+ language standard with over 40 years
 of
"upward compatibility" issues to deal with.

* * * * * * *

2) NEWS FLASH: ....
As of today (at MY request), I am no longer representing Micro Focus on J4 -
and I can go back to being a noisy (or is that nosy?) observer.   I won't go
into the reasons in public, but this was a very amicable decision and I cont
inue
to wish both Micro Focus and J4 (and their relationship) whatever is best fo
r
them both.

--
Bill Klein
wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com

I don't know if it is because of the "holiday wend" or not, but I haven't
seen any comments on this item - and have seen VERY few other posts.  This c
ould
be a problem with my newsgroup ISP - or not - but I thought I would" repost 
it"
in case others never saw the first post.

--
Bill Klein
wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com
"William M. Klein" <wmklein@nospam.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:ludRh.126542$lD4.108582@fe02.news.easynews.com...
> 1) In reply to one of the other threads and its talking about the
> "bureaucracy" of the Standards groups, I do have to remind people here and
> elsewhere, that these are the rules of ANSI and ISO - not of J4 or WG4.
> Whether languages SHOULD be under "their" control or not is another questi
on
> (and certainly the original COBOL specifications were NOT).  However, what
> works well for a 4-page Standard on screw-sizes or 10-page Standard for a
> two-plug outlet, is probably NOT all that great for handling an 800+ langu
age
> standard with over 40 years of "upward compatibility" issues to deal with.
>
>    * * * * * * *
>
> 2) NEWS FLASH: ....
>    As of today (at MY request), I am no longer representing Micro Focus on
> J4 - and I can go back to being a noisy (or is that nosy?) observer.   I w
on't
> go into the reasons in public, but this was a very amicable decision and I
> continue to wish both Micro Focus and J4 (and their relationship) whatever
 is
> best for them both.
>
> --
> Bill Klein
> wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com
>

I think it's the "wow" effect. I thought to post myself, then thought
what actually should I say/comment ?
Everybody is surely thinking why?
And you said you are not divulging that  :-)


"William M. Klein" <wmklein@nospam.netcom.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:kliSh.283422$dB6.135359@fe08.news.easynews.com...
>I don't know if it is because of the "holiday wend" or not, but I
>haven't seen any comments on this item - and have seen VERY few other
>posts.  This could be a problem with my newsgroup ISP - or not - but I
>thought I would" repost it" in case others never saw the first post.
>
> --
> Bill Klein
> wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com
> "William M. Klein" <wmklein@nospam.netcom.com> wrote in message
> news:ludRh.126542$lD4.108582@fe02.news.easynews.com... 
>
>

Most likely it actually is the holiday wend.
All of the discussion groups that I regularly
visit have been slow the past few days.

William M. Klein wrote:
> I don't know if it is because of the "holiday wend" or not, but I haven
't
> seen any comments on this item - and have seen VERY few other posts.  This
 could
> be a problem with my newsgroup ISP - or not - but I thought I would" repos
t it"
> in case others never saw the first post.
>