Re: [Sml-implementers] Portable library descriptions, a proposal

[Ken F. L. <kf...@it...>]

Hi Matthias,

> I finished a draft proposal for portable SML library descriptions.

Thanks a lot for making such a detailed and readable proposal.  

I've only had time to read it once, thus I only have a few general
questions/comments (sprinkle IMHO as needed below):

  * In general I miss some arguments for the choices made.

  * Do you think it is impossible to make a human readable/writable
    format (comment to footnote one on page one).  

  * The datatype for abstract syntax is ugly, fx why is namespace not
    an enumeration?

  * Why are the only allowed namespaces STR, SIG, and FCT?  Partly
    addressed in section 8.

> Feedback is welcome.

Should we try to structure the way feedback is given, or should we
just do it in an add-hoc fashion?  Also how do we (sml-implementers)
determine that a proposal is agreed upon?


--Ken