ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG5 N1956 Result of the WG5 letter ballot on draft Corrigendum 2 John Reid N1954 asked this question Please answer the following question "Is N1948, with the references and notes removed, acceptable for submission to SC22 for publication as Corrigendum 2 for Fortran 2008?" in one of these ways. 1) Yes. 2) Yes, but I recommend the following changes. 3) No, for the following reasons. 4) Abstain. The numbers of answers in each category were: 7 for 1) Yes (Chen, Corbett, Long, Moene, Nagle, Reid, Whitlock). 3 for 2) Yes, but I recommend the following changes (Cohen, Muxworthy, Snyder) 0 for 3) No, for the following reasons 0 for 4) Abstain The ballot has passed. David Muxworthy and the interpretations group shall consider all the comments and make the changes that they consider appropriate. The convener shall send the resulting document to WG23. Here are the responses in detail: Malcolm Cohen Some typos that do not affect the actual corrigendum itself: Edit [93:7-8] is interp F08/0061 not F03/0061. Edit [286:12-13] is interp F08/0082 not F03/0082. _______________________________________________________________________ David Muxworthy My vote is yes, but I recommend the following changes. 1. In the edit at 294:42-295:2, “If ... undefined” should read “If ... undefined.”. 2. In the edit at 296:4-5, a full stop should immediately follow "effective argument". 3. In the edit at 325:7-12, “A program ... invoked” should read “A program ... invoked.” _______________________________________________________________________ Van Snyder Acroread complained about missing fonts. Throughout, at least in my acroread installation, the bold "a" does not appear. This causes "Subclause" to be "Subcl use" and "Example" to be "Ex mple". The document should be set with more generic fonts before being sent to ISO. The editorial instructions for 10.7.5.2.2p4 specify [258:15-19]. This ought to be [258:15-20]. This won't affect the official ISO-published corrigendum.