!standard 0.1(6/5) 22-05-02 AI12-0441-1/02 !standard 0.2(11) !standard 0.2(15) !standard 0.2(17) !standard 0.2(18) !standard 0.2(19/2) !standard 0.2(22) !standard 0.2(28/5) !standard 0.2(29) !standard 0.2(35) !standard 0.2(36) !standard 0.2(38) !standard 0.2(57.1/5) !standard 0.2(57.2/5) !standard 0.2(57.3/5) !standard 0.2(57.4/5) !standard 0.2(57.5/5) !standard 0.2(57.6/5) !standard 0.2(57.7/5) !standard 0.2(57.8/5) !standard 0.2(57.9/5) !standard 0.2(57.10/5) !standard 0.2(57.11/5) !standard 0.2(57.12/5) !standard 0.2(57.13/5) !standard 0.2(57.14/5) !standard 0.2(57.15/5) !standard 0.2(57.16/5) !standard 0.2(57.17/5) !standard 0.2(57.18/5) !standard 0.2(57.19/5) !standard 0.2(57.20/5) !standard 0.2(58/1) !standard 1.1(2/3) !standard 1.1(3/4) !standard 1.1.3(16) !standard 1.2(1.1/3) !standard 1.2(1.1/3) !standard 1.2(2) !standard 1.2(3/5) !standard 1.2(4/2) !standard 1.2(4.1/3) !standard 1.2(5) !standard 1.2(5.1/3) !standard 1.2(6/3) !standard 1.2(7/3) !standard 1.2(9/3) !standard 1.2(10/2) !standard 1.2(11/5) !standard 1.4(0) !class presentation 22-04-25 !status work item 22-04-25 !status received 22-02-18 !priority Critical !difficulty Medium !subject Introductory wording changes !summary Several paragraphs need to be reworded and moved. !question ISO comment #3 says, regarding the Scope clause (1.1) other than the first paragraph: This information is more appropriate in the Introduction. In addition, the Scope shall not contain requirements (“shall”), permissions (“should”) or recommendations (“may”). It shall be worded as a series of statements of fact. ISO comment #25 says: Significant changes from the previous edition should be listed in the Foreword, not the Introduction. ISO comment #5 and #6 say in regards to 1.1.2: Neither of these annexes is cited normatively in the text, i.e. with a requirement (“shall”). ISO comment #12 says in regards to 1.2: Only references cited in the text in such a way that some or all of their content constitutes requirements of the document shall be listed in the Normative references clause. Of the documents listed here, only ISO/IEC 10646:2017 is cited in such a way as to constitute a normative reference. All the other reference documents should be moved to the Bibliography. Should these comments be addressed? (Yes.) !recommendation The 2nd and 3rd paragraphs of the scope should be deleted (the introduction has a much longer version of the same wording, so there is no point in moving it). The "significant changes" list should be given in the Foreword. The word "may" should be "can" throughout the Foreword and Introduction. Add a "shall" in the Conformity subclause. 1.2 should consist only of the reference to ISO/IEC 10646:2017. The remaining references should go to a new clause, numbered 1.4 in the RM, labeled Bibliography. !wording Add to the end of the Foreword (RM version) the paragraphs from the Introduction 57.1/5 to 57.20/5. Remove those paragraphs from the Introduction (along with their subheader). In 57.5/5 and 57.18/5, replace "may" with "can". In 57.20/5, replace "need" with "want". In the (remaining) Introduction, "may" with "can". This is needed in paragraphs 11, 15, 17, 18, 19/2, 22, 28/5, 29, 35, 36, 38, 58/1. Modify 1.1.3(16): An implementation that conforms to this Reference Manual shall support each capability required by the core language as specified. In addition, an implementation that conforms to this Reference Manual may conform to one or more Specialized Needs Annexes (or to none). Conformance to a Specialized Needs Annex means that each capability required by the Annex {shall be}[is] provided as specified. In 1.2, delete everything other than paragraphs 1/3 and 8/5. [Editor's note: Should we try to update the reference year for 10646 again? I believe there is again a newer version. Perhaps it is too late to do that?? (Last time, a number of other references needed to be changed due to changes in the document.)] [Editor's note: ISO has new boilerplate for this clause. We will *not* use that in the RM.] Add a new clause: 1.4 Biblography. The following documents, in whole or in part, are mentioned this document. Add all of the deleted paragraphs from 1.2 here. !discussion A summary of the ISO rules from the Directives part 2 (often referred to as the drafting standard) can be found in AI12-0442-1. The Introduction should not include any requirements, recommendations, or permissions. As noted in the comment above, wording that could be mistaken for those is not allowed. In the current wording, the only problem is uses of "may", when the meaning is really "can" (for possibilities). --- The actual comments #5 and #6 are nonsense: they completely ignore the sentence 1.1.2(17): All implementations shall conform to the core language. In addition, an implementation may conform separately to one or more Specialized Needs Annexes. The annexes in question are categorized as either core language or Specialized Need Annex, and the "shall" here certainly covers the annexes. We add a "shall" in the conformity subclause to ensure that the requirement for support of a Specialized Needs Annex is clearly stated. [We should consider moving 1.1.2(17) above 1.1.2(14-16), or possibly deleting 1.1.2(14-16), since they would prefer that we not repeat information from the Directives (even though hardly anyone reading a standard would have seen the Directives). We'd do either of these changes only in the ISO version, not the RM.) - Editor.] --- We concur with the ISO comment that only ISO/IEC 10646 is referenced in a way that would prevent the Ada Standard from being used without it. (The ISO/IEC 10646 character classifications form the basis of identifiers, which of course are fundamental to the lexical definition of Ada.) Some of the other Standards are referenced as the basis for Ada definitions such as Interfaces.C and Interfaces.Fortran, but those packages can be used without reference to the Standards. We add a Biblography in order to preserve the references to other standards that are discussed in the text of the Ada Standard but not actually depended upon. The Directives seem to require us to do that anyway. However, in the ISO version, the Biblography needs to be last, directly in front of the index. (And without any numbering.) We could put the RM version there as well, rather than leaving it close to the location where those references have lived for all of the existing revisions. --- We could consider making wording changes only for the ISO version (new commands would be needed in the formatter to support that if is done a lot - currently, we can only do that on a full paragraph basis or with a few macros - but new commands should not be hard to define and implement). However, that would add complications to future maintenance (as we would need to somehow have both versions in any Corrigendum document, one for our use and one for the actual ISO Corrigendum). As such, we want to make any changes that do not clearly alter the meaning or harm the understandability of the text to the Ada Reference Manual. !ASIS No ASIS effect. !ACATS test No ACATS test should be needed, no change in meaning is intended and these are notes anyway. !appendix ****************************************************************