standardizing CLX?

[rws@expo.lcs.mit.edu (Bob Scheifler)]

CLX is not, at present, considered to be an X Consortium standard.  It's just
"there".  There is some interest in the Consortium in making it a standard, but
there really aren't enough Lisp-centric organizations who are members to really
do justice to our normal review process.  So, I'm considering an alternate
process for CLX.  I'd like to find a relatively small group of people who are
willing to put time into a "formal" technical review of the CLX specification,
to produce a final document to go through a public review.  The starting point
is the document produced by TI that is included in the MIT R4 distribution.
How much needs to be done to it?  Well, that's what the technical review is for.
The commitment I need from technical reviewers is that you will carefully read
the current document, and participate in email discussions of proposed changes
(e.g. relating to the ICCCM).  I think the bug-clx list might be a reasonable
place for the discussion, although I'm open to other suggestions.  I think two
months is about the most that should be needed for technical review.  After
that, a three-month public review would be held on the proposed final document.
The cl-windows list seems like a reasonable place for public review discussions
to take place (prior CLX discussions have been held there), although I'm quite
willing to go somewhere else if cl-windows is expected to be taken over for
higher-level CLIM/whatever discussions instead.  Comments on that aspect are
welcome.

If you would be willing to participate in the technical review, please send
me mail, along with some indication of your current involvement with CLX.
If you have any comments on the content of this message, I'm interested.