Re: Issue: REQUIRE-PATHNAME-DEFAULTS (Version 5)

[Dan L. Pierson <pierson@mist.encore.com>]

    If you and Dan are amenable, I'd write the additional part -- from 
    previous mails, it should only take 10 or 20 minutes at most.  Either
    of you could probably write it too.
    
Well, I still disagree with the substance and will almost certainly
vote against such an alternative (see Gregor's reply to your message
for my reasoning).  The only thing that might change my vote would be:

    1. Standardizing the control variable, and
    2. Making its default value be no loading or DEFSYS interaction.

This would force all of Grey, etc.'s users to explictly enable the
non-portable feature if they wanted it.  I suspect that Coral, at
least, would oppose this because they evidently document REQUIRE as
the way to enable (load) proprietary extensions such as Macintosh
graphics support.

One the other hand, I'm getting the feeling that a substatial part of
cleanup disagrees with me.  Given that, and the amount of time we've
spent discussing this, I think that it is quite approptiate for you to
add a second alternative to the proposal, give it a couple of days for
cleanup comments, and send the combination to x3j13 for voting.