From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [50.116.15.146]) by inbox.vuxu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DE2E22F39 for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 20:53:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8308A431CD; Thu, 27 Jun 2024 04:53:12 +1000 (AEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tuhs.org; s=dkim; t=1719427992; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-owner:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post; bh=I5Mz7tjQ227XkOxL/bPg38wmy6Ih18OHhFi616+O+m4=; b=3Hf0eHxTWIHP53NasIMWqHtvzVWfZNoaCowIGqVHZGF8zlo2i0dgYaZsJnXjW28vKLoDbk SdGjmmp1336GXzwSmBR25079NeJs5D2qdDfuOLtGHLJ3pOyvEb/MwqQnYemcPvXakh+NHo gfuYkOc4pMNjC37gUJgTXx+nxz+V9pk= Received: from mail-40141.protonmail.ch (mail-40141.protonmail.ch [185.70.40.141]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DBB2431B7 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2024 04:53:02 +1000 (AEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1719427976; x=1719687176; bh=I5Mz7tjQ227XkOxL/bPg38wmy6Ih18OHhFi616+O+m4=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID:BIMI-Selector; b=VUPGHflY1x1v1m4tYgRPS0kUHinStdlM5Ftsxsc+01OXTbvlkn+9tlO2Hl2WNwYUY mSJXIqhBNbJzJvC5iIt33c5/+SmvOS7CZDNyumdZizAGa/Z4zoR4iLHNmJpTumopdv +4CRt+/bLpQa2uS09NdoFDyJpYMop8WAnzBKjuJIm3K8b/B77p+4brNP9F4KauhQF3 aaLFrxR/sE+69Dsl0CAUjIwu8s2pvq0CScd/R8NAsVK2JZox0/btsiCANjC8DKjTWQ iMqdmKx/k9s0ylMBCDtlm8xZ55/BBvgSHudseSRe5VAYHs21pI4U5a1P9vyWTyvFO5 CBua1mYceP5qQ== Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 18:52:53 +0000 To: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Feedback-ID: 35591162:user:proton X-Pm-Message-ID: 83cea55d19bd58040ac0442152d027e4b3358522 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID-Hash: RWA77UCK2Y4ZGO5TUVD56JDXBK4BEEJR X-Message-ID-Hash: RWA77UCK2Y4ZGO5TUVD56JDXBK4BEEJR X-MailFrom: segaloco@protonmail.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.6b1 Precedence: list Subject: [TUHS] Re: ANSI (C) vs IEEE (POSIX) Standards Body Selection List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: From: segaloco via TUHS Reply-To: segaloco On Wednesday, June 26th, 2024 at 11:43 AM, James Johnston wrote: > ANSI accredits US standards committees and delegates, both to US and Inte= rnational Meetings. > ANSI can vote to accept a standard. While I don't know the issue behind P= OSIX, it's entirely possible that ANSI accredited IEEE to standardize thing= s. They have done this to many various groups for standards within their wh= eelhouse. Sometimes this has worked well, sometimes it has worked to the in= terest of some particular entity, speaking as someone who has spent one to = many days hanging out in standards meetings as a "technical expert". >=20 > On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 11:35=E2=80=AFAM Marc Rochkind wrote: >=20 > > I think historically ANSI did languages. > > But, I don't know specifically why IEEE became the standards body for P= OSIX. I did participate for a while in the IEEE standards process (not POSI= X, but something else), and I knew it as a large, very active, well managed= organization, always eager to take on new things (such as the thing that I= was engaged in). So maybe that was one reason. > >=20 > > Maybe a greater reason is that the part of IEEE standards that did soft= ware was chaired by a person from DEC (forgot his name). I'm sure DEC had a= strong interest in a UNIX-based standard, if only to make sure that it did= n't go completely wild and negate DEC's huge head start in selling machines= to run UNIX. > >=20 > > Marc > >=20 > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 12:22=E2=80=AFPM segaloco via TUHS wrote: > >=20 > > > Good morning, I was wondering if anyone has the scoop on the rational= e behind the selection of standards bodies for the publication of UNIX and = UNIX-adjacent standards. C was published via the ANSI route as X3.159, wher= eas POSIX was instead published by the IEEE route as 1003.1. Was there ever= y any consideration of C through IEEE or POSIX through ANSI instead? Is the= re an appreciable difference suggested by the difference in publishers? In = any case, both saw subsequent adoption by ISO/IEC, so the track to an inter= national standard seems to lead to the same organizations. > > >=20 > > > - Matt G. > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > > -- > > My new email address is mrochkind@gmail.com >=20 >=20 >=20 > -- > James D. (jj) Johnston >=20 > Chief Scientist, Immersion Networks Well and that touches on one of the standards that adds some interest to th= is discussion: "An American National Standard IEEE Standard Pascal Computer= Programming Language". In this case, ANSI/IEEE 770 X3.97 is the Pascal st= andard as sponsored by both IEEE *and* ANSI. The lines can certainly blur.= Another example of a language standard under IEEE is 1076, VHDL. Could i= t be interpreted as such: IEEE is one institute among many that may originate the creation and public= ation of standards in the field of electrical engineering and adjacent fiel= ds. ANSI, in turn, is a national general standards body that publishes sta= ndards created by groups such as IEEE as well as those created relatively i= ndependently by their own committees such as X3. In other words you're liable to have IEEE standards that get tracked as ANS= I, but the likelihood of ANSI cooking something up in their own committees = and then bouncing it out to IEEE is lower if present at all? - Matt G. P.S. If anyone wants a trial-use copy of POSIX, there's one sitting on eBay= right now https://www.ebay.com/itm/145798619385