... The committee's goal is to standardize existing practice of the language
in a way that is implementable on the widest range of hardware and OS
platforms, and to provide a controlled way to add language extensions.
Ah, the problem, of course, is right there.
Too many people try to "fix" programming languages, particularly academics and folks working on a new PhD. Other folks (Gnu is the best example IMO) want to change things so the compiler writers (and it seems like the Linux kernel developers) can do something "better" or "more easily." As someone (I think Dan Cross) said, when that happens, it's no longer C. Without Dennis here to say "whoa," - the committee is a tad open loop. Today's language is hardly the language I learned before the "White Book" existed in the early/mid 1970s. It's actually quite sad. I'm not so sure we are "better" off.
Frankly, I'd probably rather see ISO drop a bunch of the stuff they are now requiring and fall back at least to K&R2 -- keep it simple. The truth is that we still use the language today is that K&R2 C was then (and still is) good enough and got (gets) the job done extremely well. Overall, I'm not sure all the new "features" have added all that much.