Talking from the perspective of an end user only, I would like to make
two suggestions.

1. Decision Flowchart. It would be nice to have a flowchart (or
something similar) that roughly depicts the decision process for feature
proposals. This might clarify discussions a lot. I'm not so much
thinking about who makes what decision when, but more about giving
answers to questions like the following and how depicting they influence
the decision process: Can this feature be implemented in current R6RS?
Can it be implemented efficiently in current R6RS? Does it require major
changes to existing implementations? Will it break R6RS code? Can it be
implemented on all platforms? Does it enhance interoperability? Does the
feature proposal presume a way of being implemented? ---and so on

2. Cross-Platform/Cross-Implementation GUI Library. From my end-user
perspective, the biggest problem is currently the lack of an
interoperable GUI widget library. I agree that this is not a matter of
the core language, but should be an SRFI. However, it seems to me that
the way the SRFI process currently works makes it virtually impossible
that a concrete proposal by one or just a few implementors would ever be
accepted. Therefore I think it would be wise to start a group/decision
process for developing a cross-platform, reasonably 'schemeish' GUI
widget API specification separately and in addition to, but perhaps
somehow affiliated with the R7RS process.

I know that for many applications GUIs are unimportant, but also believe
that for the success of Scheme as a 'mainstream', multi-purpose language
having a standardized GUI library is indispensable in the long run. I am
aware that lack of volunteers might be a problem---nevertheless, now is
the time to think about this (And don't tell me Scheme is not a
'mainstream', multi-purpose language. I prefer it for end-user
applications over Java or CL anytime, as long as the required features
are supported by the respective Scheme implementation.)

Best regards,

Erich

P.S. When answering to the second suggestion, it is not allowed to use
the term 'batteries' ;-)


_______________________________________________
r6rs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss

Reply via email to