This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 66 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 66 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
I wonder why you did not use the SRFI-4 names for your byte-vector procedures. Your rationale says "This SRFI is related to SRFI 4 (Homogeneous numeric vector datatypes), which also provides vectors of bytes. However, the extension described here does not require any extensions to the syntax of the underlying Scheme system." so why not use exactly the same procedure names as SRFI-4, but simply not support the external representation #u8(...), i.e. so that SRFI-4 is a pure extension of SRFI-66. I just don't see any good reason to invent a new SRFI-4 incompatible API for byte-vectors given that many Scheme implementations currently support SRFI-4. Marc