Atte wrote: | On Wed, 6 Feb 2002, John Chambers wrote: | > | <snip> I'm not up to | > | date with the work on the standard, is there still a commission | > | working on what to include in the standard? I really think this work is | > | extremely important if abc is to have any future. | > | > What seems to have happened is more or less consistent with the past | > work on abc. The (semi-official) standards committee started with the | > idea that what it needed was a clear formulation of abc version 1.6 | > as a standard, and has worked on codifying that. New features are to | > be put off until the current standard is established. Of course, this | > is of little relevance to people who need things not covered by | > version 1.6, so those of us have continued on our merry way inventing | > random extensions for our own use, and wondering if the standards | > folks will ever catch up. | | Ok, who's in the committee, where can one follow the progress of their | work, and what do they have to say?
http://abc.sourceforge.net/standard.html I hope nobody on the committee objects to this being posted. It's at sourceforge, so I expect that everyone understands that everything there is pretty much all public information. You need to get a project admin to approve changes, but reading a project's info is pretty easy. BTW, if you just go to sourceforge.net and use the search widget, you'll find a number of other ABC-related projects. There's one that converts DNA sequences to ABC, so you can play a gene. I'm not sure what value this may have ... To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
