Re: [Scheme-reports] Removing the requirement for a "changes since R6RS" section

[Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x>]

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Arthur A. Gleckler <scheme@x> wrote:

On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 8:56 AM, John Cowan <cowan@x> wrote:

Alex Shinn scripsit:

> My preference is to remove the entire section about R6RS.

Unfortunately, the WG voted to have it there.  However, I am willing
to change my vote, and if either Arthur or Alaric will do the same,
then we can flush it and reclaim a whole page.  Given the amount of
headache it has been, I would urge this action.

R6RS is out there, though, and even though R7RS-large is really what should be compared to R6RS, it is useful to have a concise comparison with R7RS-small.  Given that we're unlikely to make big changes at this point, I don't see why we'd flush all that work.

Well, the change list would have been much smaller comparing to R7RS-large.

If we're going to keep it, it's probably best to remove the comments and

mini-rationales.  They were useful for the original wiki format (in fact the

intent was to flesh out more detailed rationales for all changes), but people

seem to be taking them the wrong way.

-- 

Alex

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@x
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports