ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG5/N1455

Subject:  Comments arising from subgroup review of Section 10
To:       WG5
From:     Van Snyder
Date:     2 August 2001

Two areas of concern arose from reviewing Section 10.

Although subgroup has given some attention to each of these concerns,
there has not been time to give them all of the attention that they may
need.  Therefore, the revisions proposed below may not actually be
practical.

1.  The term "constant" is used improperly at [211:28] and throughout
    subclauses 10.9 and 10.10, because it is only defined for the text
    of a program.  The instance at [211:28] could be corrected by
    removing "of the constant".  The others need more extensive
    attention.  In 10.6.1.1 it is carefully stated that the sequence of
    characters produced by or suitable for input using B, O or Z editing
    is "in a form identical to a ... constant".  Similar care should be
    taken in subclauses 10.9 and 10.10.

2.  At [209:40-41] there is a very imprecise specification of the
    correspondence of the kinds of characters in the file and the
    input/output list. At [214:34-36] it is more precisely specified that
    the kind type parameter of characters transferred is determined by
    the list items.  WG5 wishes J3 to think more about nondefault
    character kinds, in particular the relation between ASCII and ISO
    10646.