Hello everybody!
Some time ago someone (I believe it was Steve Clamage - sorry, lost the
actual posting) posted a message concerning the absence of 'notes' in
public review version of C++ standard. It said that since notes are the
topics for future debate, it's no sense in voting them before passing the
draft to ANSI commitee.
Maybe it's because I am not well aware of the ANSI procedure (might someone
please explain it here?) but I do not understand this. Are those notes to
be debated and possibly reintroduced into the standard after the public
review? If yes, why not let the C++ community discuss them in advance?
If no, are they intended for some future version of the standard to be
discussed after the passing of the version prepared now?

      Hope someone can explain this              Eugene

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Eugene V. Radchenko         Graduate Student in Computer Chemistry
E-mail: eugene@qsar.chem.msu.su        Fax: +7-(095)939-0290
Ordinary mail: Chair of Organic Chemistry, Department of Chemistry,
               Moscow State University, 119899 Moscow, Russia

In article ABs49klCOI@qsar.chem.msu.su, "Eugene Radchenko" <eugene@qsar.chem.msu.su> writes:
>Hello everybody!
>Some time ago someone (I believe it was Steve Clamage - sorry, lost the
>actual posting) posted a message concerning the absence of 'notes' in
>public review version of C++ standard. It said that since notes are the
>topics for future debate, it's no sense in voting them before passing the
>draft to ANSI commitee.
>Maybe it's because I am not well aware of the ANSI procedure (might someone
>please explain it here?) but I do not understand this.

I believe it was Andy Koenig, the project editor, who posted that message.

The official draft standard represents the best work the committee has
been able to do so far, and public comment is solicited on that draft.

The "notes" are not part of the official draft. They are just comments from
individual committee members which have not yet been evaluated or voted
on by the committee. Many such comments also appear in position papers
circulated within the committee, and those are also not put up for
public comment for the same reason: they are just individual statements.
The official draft represents the consensus of the committee as reflected
by official committee votes.

Maybe this still isn't clear. I'll make an analogy: You write a paper or
a book, and send it around to your colleagues for comment. They write
comments on the circulated copy. You also send a copy to your publisher
for review. You don't send the copy with your colleagues's comments,
because you haven't decided which of them, if any, should be incorporated.
Later, you evaluate all of the comments, from colleagues and from
the publisher, and make modifications as appropriate. (Don't push this
analogy too far.)
---
Steve Clamage, stephen.clamage@eng.sun.com