Re: Scheme RFCs

[Matthias Felleisen <matthias@cs.rice.edu>]

1. I agree with Olin and Alan and whoever else thinks that schemers.org
   should be a repository of Scheme factoids and requests for
   implementations. 

2. BUT, recall that we also wanted to give Scheme implementors the ability
   to provide a mechanism like 

      (require-srfi 'srfi123 'srfi45 'srfi3)

   with which a programmer can request the reference implementations of
   SRFI, if provided. 

3. So, I suggest that we distinguish between SRFIs that are requesting an
   implementation and those that record a factoid ( (! 1) = 1 :-). How the
   SRFI people do that, I don't care. They can use names like iSRFI and
   fSRFI or have two separate threads ... 

   Personally I think that two separate "threads" would be best: one that
   would be `restrictive' as suggested by the SRFI editors and another that
   would be `open' as suggested by Alan, Olin, etc. 

-- Matthias