STANDARD-TYPE-CLASS

[David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>]

I agree with the conclusions Dick reached in the referenced message.
I only have one thing to add, which is to make sure that we don't lose
sight of the original issue that brought this up (this time), which was
to clarify the explanation of such things as which classes are not valid
as superclasses in a DEFCLASS form.  This is less ethereal than writing
programs that reason about the Lisp implementation, but not less important.