>>>>> On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 20:16:05 -0400 (EDT), Aubrey Jaffer <agj@xxxxxxxxxxxx> said: > SRFI-63 is intended to supersede SRFI-47. Now that SRFI-63 is > finalized, should SRFI-47 be withdrawn? That was never the original intention of the SRFI process. SRFI-47 should simply be marked as superseded by SRFI-63. ../Dave