Re: Issue KEYWORD-ARGUMENT-NAME-PACKAGE

[Masinter.pa@Xerox.COM]

While I think that "positional" and "named" are good ways of talking
about the different kinds of arguments, and that "key arguments" is
awkward, I don't think it is necessary for you to spend your time
rewriting the  proposal KEYWORD-ARGUMENT-NAME-PACKAGE, which doesn't
make any recommendations about terminology in the standard; rather, it
just uses it locally.

I would like to see a set of "terminology" recommendations for the spec
gathered and passed by X3J13; there are a number of other things which
have passed through here that would belong in it. I don't think they fit
into the standard form for language changes (since the considerations
are different, e.g., "current practice" might refer to existing
textbooks and programming language literature).