Austin Group Minutes of the 22 April Teleconference Austin-210 Page 1 of 1 Submitted by Andrew Josey, The Open Group. April 23, 2004 Attendees Andrew Josey, The Open Group Don Cragun , Sun, PASC OR Ulrich Drepper, Red Hat Joanna Farley, Sun Mark Brown, IBM, TOG OR Joerg Schilling Dave Butenhof, HP Nick Stoughton, USENIX, WG15 OR Draft Status --------------- Technical Corrigendum 2 (just the changes document) was published on April 2nd. Final proofing for the merged 2004 full standard document is underway, ISBN numbers have been received from IEEE, the front matter has been proofed by IEEE. Andrew is currently doing the final change barring (digit 1 for TC1, and digit 2 for TC2). The target date for publication is still April 30. The news from the ANSI secretariat is that the ISO ballot on TC2 has passed and they are awaiting Keld to post them on the SC22 web site. Andrew noted that we have not yet received enough hardcopy orders to justify an additional print run. He will send a reminder out to the group again shortly. Defect Report Processing ------------------------- The group picked up on the latest batch of defect reports, which are available at the following URL: http://www.opengroup.org/austin/aardvark/latest/ XCU ERN 18 mailx and the effects of LC_TIME OPEN This is still held open. Mark Brown agreed to take an action. XCU ERN 19 pax header fields and utf-8 OPEN Don Cragun had sent out a proposal to address this ERN ; two basic comments were received, the text should have referred to ISO 10646 rather than Unicode, and there was debate on what the default behavior should be (whether the new binary mode should be an option or the default). It was felt that the consensus on the list was that the binary be an option, so if an archive has the binary coded tag it is binary coded, if it looks like it did before it is the original format. Andrew will take the text that Don circulated and change the occurences of UniCode to ISO 10646. This would be sent down the interpretations track. XCU ERN 20 , mailx next command following a hold A/M This is recommended to go down the interpretations track, the standard says and concerns are being fwd to the sponsor. The proposed change for a future revision is as follows: 2003 Ed p600 l 23219- If the current message has not been written (for example, by the print command) since mailx started or since any other message was the current message, behave as if the print command was entered. Otherwise, if there is an undeleted message after the current message, make it the current message and behave as if the print command was entered. Otherwise, an informational message to the effect that there are no further messages in the mailbox shall be written, followed by the mailx prompt. Should the current message location be the result of an immediately preceeding "hold" or "preserve" command, next will act as if the current message has already been written. Next Steps ----------- Andrew will update the aardvark reports with the latest inbound defect reports. There are a number of open action items outstanding: 1. Don Cragun Pathname Resolution proposal 2. Larry Dwyer system() and threads 3. Joerg Schilling wording for XCU ERN 1 pax 4. Mark Brown to do further investigation for XCU ERN 18. The next teleconference call is scheduled for May 13 2004