To: comp.lang.cobol newsgroup (with various CC's)
I don't know how many notes I will (or won't) post in "response to" (or prompted by) current CLC threads about the "entire Standards process" (now, past, or
future). I will, however, post at least this one - and let others who are posting their general comments and concerns (or even those who haven't voiced their opinions in this forum) do as they wish.
NOTE:
Comments on "past" problems may or may not help "vent spleen" - but I don't personally see then as very useful for the current situation or the future of COBOL (in anything other than an historical aspect).
One current series of comments concerns what I would call
"accountability" in the current process. (This may or may not also relate to the RELEVANCE of the current process - for COBOL at least)
On the current J4 agenda at:
Is the following item:
"9.2 04-0156 - J4 Annual Report to INCITS (Schricker)"
The paper 94-0156 (Covering the Period from June 2003 to August 2004) is
available at:
If someone "interested in the COBOL standardization process" (PRO, CON, or other) felt that report either inaccurate or not reflecting issues that they think should be made known to the body to which J4 "reports", then I would send a letter (possibly including a soft/email copy - but in hard copy as well) to:
Patrick Morris
Executive Director
c/o Information Technology Industry Council
1250 Eye Street NW, Suite 200
Washington, DC 20005
202-626-5742
pmorris@itic.org
with a copy to:
Deborah Spittle
Associate Manager, Standards Operations
c/o Information Technology Industry Council
1250 Eye Street NW, Suite 200
Washington, DC 20005
202-626-5746
dspittle@itic.org
(She is listed as having support for TCs: CT22, H3, J1, J3, J4, J7, J9, J11, J15, J16, J17, J18, L2, T3, T6, T10, T11, and T20).
***
In addition, I would copy:
Ronald F. Silletti
INCITS liaison (for J4)
Corporate Program Director of Standards
Intellectual Property & Licensing
IBM Corporation
North Castle Drive,
Armonk, New York 10504
phone: 914-765-4373 fax: 914-765-4420
email: silletti@us.ibm.com
***
Finally, I would copy the J4 chair at:
Don Schricker
4012 Nancy Margarite Ln
Las Vegas, NV 89130-2618
Tel: (978) 314-6821
Fax: (702) 515-1737
Don.Schricker@microfocus.com
****
Before sending your comments, you might (or might not) want to review the information (status and otherwise) of J4's work at their "public" web page at:
That page includes links to their planned meetings and other relevant sites and documents.
To the best of my knowledge (and I could EASILY be out-of-date on this - and things might change at the meeting scheduled for next week), J4 still plans on having "Public Review" periods of their current TR's (Technical Reports) on native XML support and Collection classes during next year (2005). I believe the current hope/expectation is that these will join the Finalization TR as approved (and as an official ISO TR) in 2006 and that the first either formal or informal public review of the next full revision will occur in 2005. (With expected completion and approval of the next full revision in 2008).
If it helps any, it should be noted that to the best of *MY* (potentially out-of-date) knowledge:
- no vendor currently claims to have a compiler fully conforming to the 2002 Standard (approved two years ago this month)
- no vendor has announced a date for having such a conforming compiler
- several vendors have indicated that they have little or no immediate interest in providing such a conforming compiler
- those vendors that have indicated SOME interest in the 2002 Standard have (all - as far as I know) indicated that they are implementing features "one by one" (or so) based on current customer demand for SPECIFIC features (without - so far as they have indicated publicly) indicating that ANY vendor has received sufficient customer demand to provide a business case for EVER providing a fully conforming (to the '02 Standard) compiler
- there is no current "certification test" for the '02 Standard - nor am I aware of any governmental or private body developing such a suite (similar to the NIST test suite for the '85 Standard).
- there is no current US government requirement for "conformance" to the '02 Standard (as there was for conformance to the FIPS Standard in the '80s and '90s)
- there is no European (EUC) or Japanese (or any other that I am aware of) government body requiring (or expected to require) a conforming '02 COBOL compiler
Bill Klein
I don't know how many notes I will (or won't) post in "response to" (or prompted by) current CLC threads about the "entire Standards process" (now, past, or
future). I will, however, post at least this one - and let others who are posting their general comments and concerns (or even those who haven't voiced their opinions in this forum) do as they wish.
NOTE:
Comments on "past" problems may or may not help "vent spleen" - but I don't personally see then as very useful for the current situation or the future of COBOL (in anything other than an historical aspect).
One current series of comments concerns what I would call
"accountability" in the current process. (This may or may not also relate to the RELEVANCE of the current process - for COBOL at least)
On the current J4 agenda at:
Is the following item:
"9.2 04-0156 - J4 Annual Report to INCITS (Schricker)"
The paper 94-0156 (Covering the Period from June 2003 to August 2004) is
available at:
If someone "interested in the COBOL standardization process" (PRO, CON, or other) felt that report either inaccurate or not reflecting issues that they think should be made known to the body to which J4 "reports", then I would send a letter (possibly including a soft/email copy - but in hard copy as well) to:
Patrick Morris
Executive Director
c/o Information Technology Industry Council
1250 Eye Street NW, Suite 200
Washington, DC 20005
202-626-5742
pmorris@itic.org
with a copy to:
Deborah Spittle
Associate Manager, Standards Operations
c/o Information Technology Industry Council
1250 Eye Street NW, Suite 200
Washington, DC 20005
202-626-5746
dspittle@itic.org
(She is listed as having support for TCs: CT22, H3, J1, J3, J4, J7, J9, J11, J15, J16, J17, J18, L2, T3, T6, T10, T11, and T20).
***
In addition, I would copy:
Ronald F. Silletti
INCITS liaison (for J4)
Corporate Program Director of Standards
Intellectual Property & Licensing
IBM Corporation
North Castle Drive,
Armonk, New York 10504
phone: 914-765-4373 fax: 914-765-4420
email: silletti@us.ibm.com
***
Finally, I would copy the J4 chair at:
Don Schricker
4012 Nancy Margarite Ln
Las Vegas, NV 89130-2618
Tel: (978) 314-6821
Fax: (702) 515-1737
Don.Schricker@microfocus.com
****
Before sending your comments, you might (or might not) want to review the information (status and otherwise) of J4's work at their "public" web page at:
That page includes links to their planned meetings and other relevant sites and documents.
To the best of my knowledge (and I could EASILY be out-of-date on this - and things might change at the meeting scheduled for next week), J4 still plans on having "Public Review" periods of their current TR's (Technical Reports) on native XML support and Collection classes during next year (2005). I believe the current hope/expectation is that these will join the Finalization TR as approved (and as an official ISO TR) in 2006 and that the first either formal or informal public review of the next full revision will occur in 2005. (With expected completion and approval of the next full revision in 2008).
If it helps any, it should be noted that to the best of *MY* (potentially out-of-date) knowledge:
- no vendor currently claims to have a compiler fully conforming to the 2002 Standard (approved two years ago this month)
- no vendor has announced a date for having such a conforming compiler
- several vendors have indicated that they have little or no immediate interest in providing such a conforming compiler
- those vendors that have indicated SOME interest in the 2002 Standard have (all - as far as I know) indicated that they are implementing features "one by one" (or so) based on current customer demand for SPECIFIC features (without - so far as they have indicated publicly) indicating that ANY vendor has received sufficient customer demand to provide a business case for EVER providing a fully conforming (to the '02 Standard) compiler
- there is no current "certification test" for the '02 Standard - nor am I aware of any governmental or private body developing such a suite (similar to the NIST test suite for the '85 Standard).
- there is no current US government requirement for "conformance" to the '02 Standard (as there was for conformance to the FIPS Standard in the '80s and '90s)
- there is no European (EUC) or Japanese (or any other that I am aware of) government body requiring (or expected to require) a conforming '02 COBOL compiler
Bill Klein