> What about something like R6RS naming: "Report on the Scheme Core Language"
> and "Report on the Scheme Standard Libraries" ? This naming highlights the
> fact of a core language (WG1) with optional libraries (WG2).
I would slightly prefer `(Revised^7) Report on the {Core,Extended} Scheme
Language', because (a) they sound slightly more euphonious (to my tin ear), and
(b) calling WG2 the `Extended Scheme Language' seems more in harmony with the
WG2 charter (`Working group 2 will develop specifications, documents, and
proofs of practical implementability for a language that embodies the essential
character of Scheme...'). WG2's product can be `Extended Scheme' even if it
specifies a set of libraries.
-- vincent
_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
