Number of srfis are omitted because of "dependent on specific/different Scheme implementation" but what exactly does that mean?
For example, srfi-111 can be portably implemented on any R[67]RS-compliant implementation. Does the fact that some implementation provides them natively has something to do with this classification? Also, some srfi does need non-portable support to implement (e.g. access to hardware timer) but the interface is portable nonetheless, and it seems useful to have a standard name for them as well. (I sent this from a different email address unregistered to the srfi list before; please disregard that > moderators)
