Re: Comments on comments on Chapter 1

[Pavel.pa@Xerox.COM]

I said, in reference to the name for standard method combination:
    Rather than add one more symbol in the LISP package that has no
    intrinsic meaning (e.g., no value), I would like to see this named
    :STANDARD.  The only reason the various other built-in m-c types
aren't
    named with keywords is to make their association with the Lisp
operators
    clear.

Moon replied:
   I don't understand what you mean by "intrinsic meaning".  Binding to
   a method-combination type is as intrinsic as binding to a value in my
book.
   However, I have no objection to using a keyword as the name, other
than
   that we'll have to change the second sentence under Arguments on page
2-29
   slightly.

I think that there's no qualitative difference between the argument
:OVERWRITE to the :IF-EXISTS parameter of OPEN and the argument VARIABLE
to the second parameter of DOCUMENTATION.  Yet, in Common Lisp, one of
these is required to be a keyword and the other is required to be in the
LISP package.  I think that there are a lot of these kinds of symbols
that should all have been keywords.

	Pavel