ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 22 N 4290 2007-11-01

Replaces

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 22

Programming Languages

Document Type: Summary of Voting/Table of Replies

Document Title: Summary of Voting on FDIS Ballot for ISO/IEC 11404, Information
technology – General Purpose Datatypes (GPD)

Document Source: ITTF

Project Number:

Document Status: This document is circulated to SC 22 members for information. As

per the results of this ballot, the FDIS has been approved. This text
will go forward to publication. WG 11 is instructed to review the
comments received, and consider them in a future revision of this
standard.

Action ID: FYI

Due Date:

No. of Pages: 18

Secretariat, ISO/IEC JTC 1, American National Standards Institute, 25 West 43rd Street, New York, NY 10036; Telephone: 1 212 642 4932;
Facsimile: 1 212 840 2298; Email: lrajchel@ansi.org
English Title: Information technology -- General-Purpose Datatypes (GPD)
French Title: Technologies de l'information -- Types de données

Document reference: ISO/IEC FDIS 11404 Committee: ISO/IEC/JTC 1/SC 22

Start date: 2007-08-22 End date: 2007-10-22
Opened by ISO/CS on: 2007-08-16 09:54 Closed by ISO/CS on: 2007-10-24 04:30

Voting stage: Approval

Status: Closed Version: 1
Vote in parallel with:
Role: ContentOwner Organization: ANSI
Note:

Result of voting
P-Members voting: 16 in favour out of 17 = 94.11% (requirement >= 66.66%)

(P-Members having abstained are not counted in this vote.)

Member bodies voting: 1 negative votes out of 22 = 4.54% (requirement <= 25%)

Approved
Ballot Content
Download
Comments
Type Country Member Participation Voted Functions Modified

Australia SA P Member Abstention 2007-08-21 06:58

Azerbaijan AZSTAND P Member 2007-10-24 04:30

Belgium NBN P Member 2007-10-24 04:30

Canada SCC P Member Abstention 2007-10-01 15:13

China SAC P Member Approval 2007-10-15 05:17

Côte-d'Ivoire CODINORM P Member 2007-10-24 04:30

Cyprus CYS P Member 2007-10-24 04:30

Czech Republic CNI P Member Approval 2007-10-22 13:26

Denmark DS P Member Approval 2007-09-28 12:30

Ecuador INEN P Member Abstention 2007-10-23 21:48

Egypt EOS O Member Approval 2007-10-21 08:51

Finland SFS P Member Abstention 2007-08-22 13:14

France AFNOR P Member Abstention 2007-10-19 09:44

Germany DIN P Member Approval 2007-10-17 16:00

India BIS P Member Approval 2007-10-15 06:49

Indonesia BSN O Member Approval 2007-10-22 09:09

Iran, Islamic Republic of ISIRI P Member Approval 2007-10-23 13:46

Ireland NSAI P Member Approval 2007-09-26 13:49

Italy UNI P Member Approval 2007-10-17 14:12

Jamaica JBS P Member Abstention 2007-10-23 22:52

Japan JISC P Member Disapproval 2007-10-18 12:20

Kazakhstan KAZMEMST P Member Approval 2007-10-18 14:55

Kenya KEBS P Member Approval 2007-10-01 13:38

Korea, Republic of KATS P Member Approval 2007-10-19 07:09

Luxembourg SEE O Member Approval 2007-10-16 14:23

Malaysia DSM P Member Abstention 2007-08-16 11:18

Malta MSA P Member Abstention 2007-09-28 08:48

Netherlands NEN P Member Approval 2007-10-11 10:06

New Zealand SNZ P Member Abstention 2007-10-09 04:46

Nigeria SON P Member 2007-10-24 04:30

Norway SN P Member Approval 2007-10-09 16:30

Pakistan PSQCA P Member 2007-10-24 04:30

Romania ASRO O Member Approval 2007-09-28 08:37

Russian Federation GOST R O Member Abstention 2007-10-12 10:02

Saudi Arabia SASO P Member Abstention 2007-10-03 14:02

Singapore SPRING SG P Member Abstention 2007-08-17 10:26

Slovenia SIST P Member Abstention 2007-10-19 14:34

South Africa SABS P Member Abstention 2007-08-17 15:32

Spain AENOR P Member Abstention 2007-10-22 13:49

Switzerland SNV P Member Abstention 2007-10-15 08:21

Trinidad and Tobago TTBS P Member Approval 2007-10-22 22:22

Turkey TSE P Member 2007-10-24 04:30

Ukraine DSSU O Member Approval 2007-10-02 10:04

United Kingdom BSI P Member Approval 2007-10-15 15:37

Uruguay UNIT P Member Abstention 2007-10-16 18:34

USA ANSI Secretariat Approval 2007-10-09 15:03

Venezuela FONDONORMA P Member 2007-10-24 04:30

Template for comments and secretariat observations Date: Document:

1 2 (3) 4 5 (6) (7)

MB1 Clause No./ Paragraph/ Type Comment (justification for change) by the MB Proposed change by the MB Secretariat observations
Subclause No./ Figure/Table/ of on each comment submitted
Annex Note com-
(e.g. 3.1) (e.g. Table 1) ment2

ES Abstention due to the absence of national position

JP0 2 ge In this section, only a limited number of standards are
1 referred to.
However, in the main text of this standard, many other
standards are referred to. We found the references to the
following documents.

ISO/IEC Guide 2
ISO/IEC 11179
ISO/IEC 13886
ISO/IEC 10176
ISO/IEC 11578
ISO/IEC 8859-1
ISO/IEC 10967
ISO/IEC 1539-1
ISO/IEC 2375
ISO/IEC 7350
ISO/IEC 10036

We agree that most references to these documents are in

the informative parts of this standard, but at least the
following three are referred to in the normative part, and
should be considered as a part of the provision
of this standard.

ISO/IEC 2375
ISO/IEC 7350
ISO/IEC 10036

These standards should be referred to in this section.

JP0 6.6 Note 5 te > NOTE 5 Equal is always a characterizing operation on
2 >datatypes with the equality property.

According to 6.3.1, every value space has a notion of

equality. We suggest to change "on datatypes with the
equality property" to "on every datatype". If there are
1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general te = technical ed = editorial
NOTE Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 1 of 14
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Template for comments and secretariat observations Date: Document:

1 2 (3) 4 5 (6) (7)

MB1 Clause No./ Paragraph/ Type Comment (justification for change) by the MB Proposed change by the MB Secretariat observations
Subclause No./ Figure/Table/ of on each comment submitted
Annex Note com-
(e.g. 3.1) (e.g. Table 1) ment2

some types not having equality, it should be explicitly

mentioned.
JP0 7 ge > This International Standard defines a datatype
3 > specification language, in order to formalize the
> identification and declaration of datatypes conforming to
> this International Standard. The language is a subset of
> the Interface Definition Notation defined in ISO/IEC
> 13886:1996, Information technology.
> LanguageIndependent Procedure Calling (LIPC).5)
> This clause defines the basic syntactic objects used in
> that language.

We understand that the convention in this standard is not

to mention the published year of standards referred to. If
this is true, ":1996" for 13886 should be deleted.
JP0 7.5 Syntax: ed The position of the header "Syntax:" is not correct.
4
JP0 7.5.1 Syntax: ed The position of the header "Syntax:" is not correct.
5
JP0 7.5.2 Syntax: ed There should be an empty line before the "Syntax:"
6 header.
JP0 7.6 Syntax: ed The position of the header "Syntax:" is not correct.
7
JP0 8 ed There should be a "Syntax:" header before the syntax
8 rule.
JP0 8.1 ed There should be a "Syntax:" header before the syntax
9 rule.
JP1 8.1.1 Values: ed In the description of "Values:", each of "true" and "false"
0 appears twice. Their fonts are different in these two
appearances.
JP1 8.1.2 Syntax: te > list-source-reference = identifier |
1 > '"', URI-text, '"' ;

1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general te = technical ed = editorial
NOTE Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 2 of 14
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Template for comments and secretariat observations Date: Document:

1 2 (3) 4 5 (6) (7)

MB1 Clause No./ Paragraph/ Type Comment (justification for change) by the MB Proposed change by the MB Secretariat observations
Subclause No./ Figure/Table/ of on each comment submitted
Annex Note com-
(e.g. 3.1) (e.g. Table 1) ment2

> URI-text = '"', URI defined by IETF RFC2396, '"' ;

According to this syntax, a list-source-reference must

have two double-quotes before the URI, and also two
double-quotes after the URI.
This is quite strange. We suspect that this syntax does
not reflect the intention of the author.

JP1 8.1.2 Syntax: te > When the list-source is an objectidentifier-value,

3 > it shall denote a valid value of the objectidentifier
> datatype, as defined in 10.1.10. In either case, the list-
> source value shall identify a document that explicitly
> defines a set of code values and their denotations.

The term "objectidentifier-value" does not appear in the

syntax rule. Such a sentence should be written using
syntax terms, but this sentence does not conform to this
style.
JP1 8.1.3 Operations: ed > Equal(x, y: enumerated(enumerated-value-list)):
4 > boolean is true if x and y designate the same value in
> the enum-value-list, and false otherwise.

The term "enum-value-list" is a typo. It should be

changed to "enumerated-value-list". Moreover, the font of
this term is not correct.
JP1 8.1.3 Note 2 ed > NOTE 2 The ordering on enumerated types imposed
5 > by programming languages is a convenience that
> allows programs to reference all the values via for-loops
> and enables the compiler to use integer encodings to
> simplify implementation. Properly, the Enumerated type
> should be chosen over the State type only when the
> ordering has semantic value. However, it may be
> necessary to declare the datatype of an object to be an
> Enumerated GPD when the purpose is to ensure the
> correct interpretation of an integer-based
> implementation.

1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general te = technical ed = editorial
NOTE Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 3 of 14
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Template for comments and secretariat observations Date: Document:

1 2 (3) 4 5 (6) (7)

MB1 Clause No./ Paragraph/ Type Comment (justification for change) by the MB Proposed change by the MB Secretariat observations
Subclause No./ Figure/Table/ of on each comment submitted
Annex Note com-
(e.g. 3.1) (e.g. Table 1) ment2

The term "Enumerated type" should be changed to

"enumerated type" (do not capitalize the first letter, two
places).
JP1 8.1.4 Example te > type Latin1 = character({ iso standard 8859 1 });
6
The word "part" should be inserted between "8859" and
"1", in order to conform to the preceding example.
JP1 8.1.7 Operations: ed > NonNegative(x: integer): boolean is
7 > true if x = 0 or x can be developed
> by one or more iterations of adding 1,

"adding to what" is not mentioned. "to 0" should be

inserted after "adding 1".
JP1 8.1.7 Operations: te > InOrder(x, y: integer): boolean
8 > = NonNegative(Add(x, Negate(y))).

This definition is not correct. The meaning of the function

"InOrder" is "less than or equal to", so the right hand side
of this formula should be "NonNegative(Add(Negate(x),
y))".
JP1 8.1.8 Operations: ge > Operations: Equal, NonNegative, InOrder, Add, Negate,
9 > Multiply, Reciprocal, Promote.

The order of operation names is not consistent with the

order of the following operation definitions. "Promote"
should come before "Add".
JP2 8.1.8 Operations: te > InOrder(x, y: integer): Boolean
0 > = NonNegative(Add(x, Negate(y))).

This definition is not correct. The meaning of the function

"InOrder" is "less than or equal to", so the right hand side
of this formula should be "NonNegative(Add(Negate(x),
y))".
JP2 8.1.9 Note 2 te > NOTE 2 Any reasonable rounding algorithm is
1 > equally acceptable. What is required is that any
> rational value v which is not a value of the
1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general te = technical ed = editorial
NOTE Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 4 of 14
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Template for comments and secretariat observations Date: Document:

1 2 (3) 4 5 (6) (7)

MB1 Clause No./ Paragraph/ Type Comment (justification for change) by the MB Proposed change by the MB Secretariat observations
Subclause No./ Figure/Table/ of on each comment submitted
Annex Note com-
(e.g. 3.1) (e.g. Table 1) ment2

> scaled datatype is mapped into one of the two scaled

> values n.r^(-f) and (n+1).r^(-f), such that in the Rational
> value space, n.r^(-f) v (n+1).r^(-f).

We suspect that this Note is not correct. According to the

definition of "Round" given in this section, "Round" always
returns a value less than or equal to the argument
(maximum of such values). The choice among n.r^(-f)
and (n+1).r^(-f) should not be arbitrary.
JP2 8.1.10 Value- ed > A real-literal denotes a value of a real datatype. The
2 syntax: > integer-literal is interpreted as a decimal integer value,
> and the scale-factor, if present, is interpreted as number
> raised to the power signed-number, where number and
> signed-number are expressed as decimal integers. If
> the scale-factor is not present, the value is
> that denoted by integer-literal. If the scale-factor is
> present, the value denoted is the rational value
> Multiply(integer-literal, scale-factor).

In this description, the font of the word "number" is not

correct (two places).
JP2 8.2 ed There should be a "Syntax:" header before the syntax
0 rule.
JP2 8.2 ed > relationship between the value spaces of the base
3 > datatype and the sub-type.

The hyphen in the word "sub-type" should be deleted.

JP2 8.2 ed > informal name for the sub-type generator, and the
4 > subtype generator is

The hyphen in the word "sub-type" should be deleted.

JP2 8.2.4 Components ge > Components: base shall designate a generated
5 : > datatype resulting from the sequence, set, bag, or table
> generator, or from a new datatype generator whose
> value space is constructed by such a generator (see
> 9.1.3). minimum-size shall have an integer value

1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general te = technical ed = editorial
NOTE Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 5 of 14
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Template for comments and secretariat observations Date: Document:

1 2 (3) 4 5 (6) (7)

MB1 Clause No./ Paragraph/ Type Comment (justification for change) by the MB Proposed change by the MB Secretariat observations
Subclause No./ Figure/Table/ of on each comment submitted
Annex Note com-
(e.g. 3.1) (e.g. Table 1) ment2

> greater than or equal to zero, and maximum-size, if it is

> a value-expression, shall have an integer value such
> that minimum-size = maximum-size. If maximum-size is
> omitted, the maximum size is taken to be equal to
> the minimum-size, and if maximum-size is "*", the
> maximum size is taken to be unlimited. minimum-size
> and maximum-size shall not be formal-parametric-
> values, except in some occurrences in declarations
> (see 9.1).

We cannot understand why "zero" is used instead of "0".

JP2 8.2.4 Subtypes: te > Subtypes: Any size subtype of the same base datatype,
6 > such that base-minimum-size = subtype-minimum-size,
> and subtype-maximum-size = base-maximum-size.

The template definition in 8.2 lists only the following

items.

Description:
Syntax:
Components:
Values:
Properties:

It does not say anything on "Subtypes:". Nonetheless,

"Subtypes:"s appear here and there in these sections.

"Subtypes:" should also be listed and be given its

definition in 8.2.
JP2 8.2.6 NOTE 1 ge > NOTE 1 The value space of a datatype is the set of
7 > values specified in the definition of the datatype.
> Sentinel values are values that can occur wherever
> values of the value space can occur; they can be
> distinguished by Equal from values in the value space.
> Sentinel values must be specified explicitly even for a
> datatype that is defined axiomatically. For example, it
> follows that {short, medium, tall} and {short, medium,
1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general te = technical ed = editorial
NOTE Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 6 of 14
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Template for comments and secretariat observations Date: Document:

1 2 (3) 4 5 (6) (7)

MB1 Clause No./ Paragraph/ Type Comment (justification for change) by the MB Proposed change by the MB Secretariat observations
Subclause No./ Figure/Table/ of on each comment submitted
Annex Note com-
(e.g. 3.1) (e.g. Table 1) ment2

> tall; sentinels = Unknown, Unspecified}

> are two distinct datatypes with the same value space.

We cannot understand the semicolon syntax in "{short,

medium, tall; sentinels = Unknown, Unspecified}". We
understand that there are no syntax definitions in this
standard giving such a syntax.
JP2 8.3 ed There should be a "Syntax:" header before the syntax
8 rule.
JP2 8.3.1 Operations: ed > where type is the alternative datatype of the selected
9 Equal(...) > alternative and type.Equal is the Equal operation on the
> datatype type,

This is the explanation of the function "Equal". The font of

the word "type" at the end of this sentence is not correct.
JP3 8.3.3 Values: ge > A_j = E_{1 j} x E_{2 j} x ... x E_{m j},
0
We understand that the number of terms may be different
for each of the termination-lists, thus the number of terms
"m" depends on "j".
Since "m" is not a stand-alone constant, it should be
changed to "m_j" ("m" suffixed by "j"). The last term
should have two-level suffix.
JP3 8.4 ed There should be a "Syntax:" header before the syntax
1 rule.
JP3 8.4.1, Note 3 ed > record datatype) is not a sub-type of the base record
2 > datatype: none of

The hyphen in the word "sub-type" should be deleted.

JP3 8.4.2 Operations: te > Equal(x, y: class (attribute-list)): boolean If there exists
3 > an Equal procedure for the class, then is Equal(x,y).
> Otherwise if there are no procedure definitions then is
> true if for every attribute-identifier f of the class
> datatype, attribute-type.Equal(AttributeSelect.f(x),
> AttributeSelect.f(y)), else false (where attribute-
1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general te = technical ed = editorial
NOTE Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 7 of 14
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Template for comments and secretariat observations Date: Document:

1 2 (3) 4 5 (6) (7)

MB1 Clause No./ Paragraph/ Type Comment (justification for change) by the MB Proposed change by the MB Secretariat observations
Subclause No./ Figure/Table/ of on each comment submitted
Annex Note com-
(e.g. 3.1) (e.g. Table 1) ment2

> type.Equal is the equality relationship on the attribute

> datatype corresponding to f). Otherwise is
> indeterminate.

This definition distinguishes classes having procedure

definitions from those not having them. However, it is not
clear what is the meaning of "there are no procedure
definitions". According to the syntax rules, a class type
can have attributes but not procedure definitions.

We wonder that if there are attributes having procedure

types, it is said that there are procedure
definitions. However, if this is the case, we like to ask a
few more questions. Why do you handle procedure types
differently from other types? Procedure types have
equality operations, so it would be unnecessary to handle
procedure types differently.
JP3 Operations: 8.4.2 ed > There is one AttributeSelect and one AttributeReplace
4 > operation for each attribute in the class datatype that is
> an attribute procedure, of the forms:

In this section, there are two sentences beginning with

"There is one AttributeSelect ...". This is the second
one. The functions given after this sentence are
"AttributeFunctionInvoke" and
"AttributeFunctionOverride".
"AttributeSelect" and "AttributeReplace" seem to be typos.
JP3 8.4.2 Operations: te > AttributeFunctionInvoke.attribute-identifier(x: class
5 > (attribute-list)): attribute-type(parameter-list) is the value
> of the attribute function of class x whose attribute-
> identifier is attribute-identifier.

Here, the term "attribute function" appears, but this term

never appeared in the preceding part of this standard. Is
it different from "attribute procedure"?
JP3 8.4.3 Values: ed > Values: every set of distinct values from the value
6 > space of the element datatype, including the set of no
1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general te = technical ed = editorial
NOTE Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 8 of 14
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Template for comments and secretariat observations Date: Document:

1 2 (3) 4 5 (6) (7)

MB1 Clause No./ Paragraph/ Type Comment (justification for change) by the MB Proposed change by the MB Secretariat observations
Subclause No./ Figure/Table/ of on each comment submitted
Annex Note com-
(e.g. 3.1) (e.g. Table 1) ment2

> values, called the empty-set. A value of a set datatype

> can be modeled as a mathematical function whose
> domain is the value space of the element datatype and
> whose range is the value space of the boolean datatype
> (true, false), i.e., if s is a value of datatype set of (E),
> then s: E->B, where B is the set of Boolean values true
> and false, and for any value e in the value space of E,
> s(e) = true means e "is a member of" the set-value s,
> and s(e) = false means e "is not a member of" the set-
> value s. The value-space of the set datatype then
> comprises all functions s which are distinct (different at
> some value e of the element datatype).

The font of the word "B" in "where B is the set of ..." is not
correct.
JP3 8.4.4 Values: te > Values: all finite collections of instances of values from
7 > the element datatype, including the empty collection.
> A value of a bag datatype can be modeled as a
> mathematical function whose domain is the value
> space of the element datatype and whose range is the
> non-negative integers, i.e., if b is a value of datatype
> bag of (E), then b: E-Z, where Z is the set of integers,
> and for any value e in the value space of E, b(e) = 0
> means e "does not occur in" the bag-value b, and b(e) =
> n, where n is a positive integer, means e "occurs n
> times in" the bag-value b. The value-space of the bag
> datatype then comprises all functions b which are
> distinct.

The direction of the arrow between "E" and "Z" is not

correct. Since the function "b" is used in the form "b(e)",
its domain is "E" and its range is "Z".
JP3 8.4.4 Operations: te > i.e. the collection formed by deleting one instance of the
8 delete(...) > value y, if any, from the collection e;

The term "collection" is too vague in this context. It

should be changed to "bag".
1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general te = technical ed = editorial
NOTE Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 9 of 14
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Template for comments and secretariat observations Date: Document:

1 2 (3) 4 5 (6) (7)

MB1 Clause No./ Paragraph/ Type Comment (justification for change) by the MB Proposed change by the MB Secretariat observations
Subclause No./ Figure/Table/ of on each comment submitted
Annex Note com-
(e.g. 3.1) (e.g. Table 1) ment2

JP3 8.4.6 Note 6 te > n n

9 > 1+ Sigma Mapi(xi) (Pi sizej+1)
> i=1 j=1

This expression seems incorrect. In order to compute the

ordinal value of a set of index values, the lower bound of
the Pi operation should not be "1", but "i+1" or something
of that nature.
JP4 8.4.6 Note 6 te > SCREEN(COLUMN, ROW) = S
0 > is equivalent to the characterizing operation:
> Replace(screen, column, row, S)

We suspect that this equivalence does not hold. The

former operation includes the assignment to an array
element, while the latter produces a fresh array. The
element in the original array is not changed.
JP4 8.5 ed There should be a "Syntax:" header before the syntax
1 rules.

JP4 8.5 te > The type-declaration identifies the type-identifier in the

2 > type-reference with a single datatype, a family of
> datatypes, or a datatype generator. If the type-identifier
> designates a single datatype, then the type-reference
> refers to that datatype. If the type-identifier designates
> a datatype family, then the type-reference refers to that
> member of the family whose value space is identified
> by the type-definition after substitution of each actual-
> type-parameter value for all occurrences of the
> corresponding formal-parametric-value. If the type-
> identifier designates a datatype generator, then the
> type-reference designates the datatype resulting from
> application of the datatype generator to the actual
> parametric datatypes, that is, the datatype whose value
> space is identified by the type-definition after
> substitution of each actual-type-parameter datatype for

1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general te = technical ed = editorial
NOTE Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 10 of 14
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Template for comments and secretariat observations Date: Document:

1 2 (3) 4 5 (6) (7)

MB1 Clause No./ Paragraph/ Type Comment (justification for change) by the MB Proposed change by the MB Secretariat observations
Subclause No./ Figure/Table/ of on each comment submitted
Annex Note com-
(e.g. 3.1) (e.g. Table 1) ment2

> all occurrences of the corresponding formal-parametric-

> type. In all cases, the defined datatype has the values,
> properties and characterizing operations defined,
> explicitly or implicitly, by the type-declaration.

The last word "type-declaration" seems inappropriate

here. This term does not appear in any syntax rules in this
section. We think that it should be changed to "the type-
declaration of the type-identifier" or something like that.
JP4 8.6 ed There should be a "Syntax:" header before the syntax
3 rules.
JP4 8.6.1.5 Syntax: te > value-spec-value = "nil" |
4 > range-expr |
> "(", select-list, ")" |
> value-expression ;

"range-expr" is an undefined notion in this

standard. There is no syntax definition for "range-expr".
JP4 8.6.4.1 Description: ge > Description: Specifies that the components of record or
5 > class type are ordered, unordered, or unspecified.

This description is misplaced. It is not an explanation of

usage triggers.
JP4 9 ed There should be a "Syntax:" header before the syntax
6 rule.
JP4 9.2 Syntax: ed The position of the header "Syntax:" is not correct.
7
JP4 9.3 ed There should be a "Syntax:" header before the syntax
8 rules.
JP4 10.2.2 NOTE te > NOTE Tree is an aggregate datatype which is formally
9 > an aggregate (sequence) of tree_members.
> Conceptually, tree is an aggregate datatype whose
> values are aggregates of leaf values. In either case,
> it is proper to consider Tree a homogeneous aggregate.
1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general te = technical ed = editorial
NOTE Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 11 of 14
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Template for comments and secretariat observations Date: Document:

1 2 (3) 4 5 (6) (7)

MB1 Clause No./ Paragraph/ Type Comment (justification for change) by the MB Proposed change by the MB Secretariat observations
Subclause No./ Figure/Table/ of on each comment submitted
Annex Note com-
(e.g. 3.1) (e.g. Table 1) ment2

In this standard, an "aggregate type" is not a concrete

type, and does not have its own syntax. The notation
"aggregate (sequence) of ..." is not appropriate.
JP5 B.3 ed > procedure-at-tributes should be distinguishable from
0 > type- or component- attributes by their text.

The hyphen in the word "at-tributes" should be deleted.

The space between "component-" and "attributes" should

be deleted.
JP5 C.3 ed > scaled(radix, precision) range(radix- precision, 1)
1 > excluding(1).

The space between "-" and "precision" should be deleted.

JP5 C.3 ge > This representation can be characterized by five
2 > parameters: radix and precision, from above; emin and
> emax, with the requirement: emin = E = emax; and
> denorm, with the requirement that denorm = false
> implies d = R-1 and denorm = true implies
> d = R-precision.

The symbol "d" is defined here, but where is it used?

JP5 C.4 ed > v = S x M x R-P
3
Why do you use a symbol for multiplication different from
that in C.3?
JP5 ed typographical error throughout the standard >>
4
In syntax rules, syntactic items should be separated by a
comma,but this comma is often missing. Insert a comma
at the following places.

8.1.4, Syntax: after ","

> repertoire-list = repertoire-identifier,

1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general te = technical ed = editorial
NOTE Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 12 of 14
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Template for comments and secretariat observations Date: Document:

1 2 (3) 4 5 (6) (7)

MB1 Clause No./ Paragraph/ Type Comment (justification for change) by the MB Proposed change by the MB Secretariat observations
Subclause No./ Figure/Table/ of on each comment submitted
Annex Note com-
(e.g. 3.1) (e.g. Table 1) ment2

> { "," repertoire-identifier } ;

8.4.4, after "independent-value"

> value-list = "(", independent-value

> { ",", independent-value }, ")" ;

8.6, after "actual-parameter"

> actual-parameter-list = actual-parameter { ",", actual-

parameter } ;

9.2, after "value" and after "="

> value-declaration = "value" value-identifier, ":", type-

specifier,
> "=" independent-value ;

9.5.1, after "including", after "(", after "select-list"

> import-type = "import", URI-or-type-identifier,

> { "including" "(" select-list ")" |

9.5.1, after "excluding", after "(", after "select-list"

> "excluding" "(" select-list ")" } ;

9.5.2, after "(", after "parameter-list"

> macro-definition = "macro", identifier, "(" parameter-list

")" ,
> "{", text, "}";

10.1.5, after " "

> character-name = identifier, { " " identifier } ;

1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general te = technical ed = editorial
NOTE Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 13 of 14
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Template for comments and secretariat observations Date: Document:

1 2 (3) 4 5 (6) (7)

MB1 Clause No./ Paragraph/ Type Comment (justification for change) by the MB Proposed change by the MB Secretariat observations
Subclause No./ Figure/Table/ of on each comment submitted
Annex Note com-
(e.g. 3.1) (e.g. Table 1) ment2

10.1.10, after "identifier", after "(", after "numberform"

> nameandnumberform = identifier "(" numberform ")" ;

10.1.10, after "registry-name"

> collection-identifier = registry-name registry-index ;

JP5 ed typographical error throughout the standard
5
Even if a term "xxx" is printed in a font different from usual
one,its plural form "xxxs" should not be solely printed in
that font.

The last letter "s" should be printed in the usual font. This
convention can be observed, for example, in the
paragraph beginning with "When a termination-list is
present, ..." in 8.3.3. The terms "parameter-
types" and "parameters" are printed in this mixed-font
style.

However, this convention is not strictly enforced

throughout the standard. For example, the last word of
the first paragraph of 9.1.2, "formal-type-parameters" is
printed in a single special font.

We like to have a uniform usage of fonts.

1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general te = technical ed = editorial
NOTE Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 14 of 14
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10