Attendance:

Willem Botha
Stephen Pelc
Leon Wagner
Andrew Haley
Peter Knaggs
Ulrich Hoffmann
Gerald Wodni
Anton Ertl
Bernd Paysan
Sergey Baranov

Review of document
  Accepted except for a few changes 7Y:0:0 (AH, BP, SB absent)

Constitution
  Accepted 10Y:0:0

  Vote: Chair: SP 6, AE 4
        Editor: PK 10
        Technical Edoitor: GW 10
        Treasurer: BP 10

Stephen Pelc takes on the duties of the chair

Publishing the standard:
  It should have an ISBN.  Discussion and subcommittee appointed
  Some changes of introductory material

Rolling document update: The last standard is now Forth-2012.
  Discussion, especially about extension queries
  Accept 10Y:0:0

1 Chars=1: Accept: 9Y:1N:0A

Quotations: Accept: 6Y:1N:3A (no consensus, more practice wanted)

S>F D>F: Accept: 10Y:0N:0N

Discussion of RfDs:
Recognizers: Presentation and discussion
Memory Access: Presentation and discussion, subcommittee BP SP
New double syntax: Only destandardize, no new syntax, #1. is enough
  groups separators as a possible separate proposal
UD<
  While most committee members prefer UD as a prefix, they currently
  do not feel that this is sufficient grounds for renaming DU<.
  However, proposing new words with a UD prefix is fine, and if they
  are accepted, maybe the feeling of the committee about DU< will
  change.

Proposals from forth-standard.org

wlscope
    Presentation and discussion; BP will make a reply on behalf of the
    committee.
Defer is not
     Presentation and Discussion: AE will reply: The committee knows
     how to implement forward declarations without the extra fetch
     required by deferred words.  However, the benefit (a minor
     speedup in a relatively rare case) does not justify the cost in
     our opinion.

Progress reports:
  single xt: No progress BP/SP/AE
  Floating point input: What is this about?  Delete it
  Socket wordset/library: Small progress GW
  Multi-Tasking/threading: Common practice exists: AH/GW
  Internationalization: SP/PK/WB
  Cross-compilers: The starting point for the proposal is now
     outdated, and there is no client interest in standardizing
     cross-compilers.  Therefore abandon it (SP).
  IEEE FP: IEEE 754 is now so complex that it is too much work both in
     the specification and in the implementation to follow that in the
     Forth standard.  There is a lot of common practice based on all
     FP hardware these days providing IEEE FP, and programs just can
     declare an environmental dependency on that.  Therefore abandon
     the proposal (AH).

Matters arising
  Libraries/Packages
    directory words needed; discussion
  Experimental Proposals
     For some RfDs, we want to encourage the community to implement
     them in systems experimentally, and use them in programs to
     encourage feedback and common practice; the proposal is still
     subject to change, but the perspective is that something in that
     vein is intended to be standardized in the future.  10Y:0:0
  Proposals Process
     I was absent during this discussion
  Extension Queries
     SP writes a proposal that removes the "maybe" answer
  Ambiguous Conditions
     Let's try to get rid of ambiguous conditions; proposals needed
  
Any other business
  Directory Access
    Discussion, GW writes summary
  C Interface
    Work on standardizing calling
    Name: as in the C function, use same case
    Order of parameters: leftmost bottom, rightmost top
    FP values are converted between the Forth type and whatever
      the C function expects or returns
    Integers: Some are passed as doubles: identify which types are
      doubles per standard
    Strings: divergent practice, const char * is string
    Declarations: covered by using SWIG?
    dll/.so files: no common practice yet
      OS-Type query
  Case Insensitivity
    RfD on making ASCII characters case insensitive AE