On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Arthur A. Gleckler
<[email protected]>wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 9:02 PM, Alex Shinn <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> Unfortunately, when the formal syntax differs from the prose,
>> the formal syntax takes precedence.  Whatever the WG intentions
>> may have been, the community ratified a standard in which \|
>> is not a predefined escape sequence in strings.  Referring to old
>> ballots was fine during the process, but now can only serve for
>> historical interests and to dig up rationales.
>>
>
> I don't have a strong feeling about this particular issue, but
> historically, I believe the rule has been that the prose takes precedence.
>

I don't have a strong feeling either, and it's a very minor issue.

There may well be debate on which takes precedence.
The best precedent I can find is:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.scheme/aOGfORCC0RU/5STycey-sEoJ

which seems to imply only that opinions differ, and it's
up to the editors to clarify.

However, I do stand by the notion that past WG ballots
and intentions are superseded by later discussion.
This was a community effort with a community ratification,
and the most recent and specific discussion on the issue
was in reference to the formal syntax, so I think that should
take precedence.

If the other two editors disagree you can add it to
the errata.

-- 
Alex
_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports

Reply via email to