[TUHS] Re: ANSI (C) vs IEEE (POSIX) Standards Body Selection

Boy, I hate people rewriting history. As someone who lived it, it is just not the case. I do not doubt that rms will try to take credit, but I think a few of us there should send notes to Open Group. FYI: Jim Issak was a marketing guy from Charles River Data Systems, which is abbreviated C-R-D-S, and the firm always spelled out the letters. But the rest of us pronounced it CRuDS—adding an "u" and pronouncing it—which I was referred to in my first email. When the P1003 committee was established, Jim was aware of the naming issue, particularly after the CRDS experience. There was a great argument in one of the early meetings about whether it should just be a "*Portable Operating System*" as opposed to a "*Portable Operating System Interface*." The concern was that we were starting with the System Call API or interface [which we had inherited from /usr/group) but planned from the beginning (even in /usr/group days) to be more than the system call API. As I said, we started with the System API as that would be hard enough to find common ground -- remember DEC, in particular, was pushing for VMS-like stuff (case folding in file names). As you can see, we agree to use an add interface. Hal's comment about it being called IEEEIX is strange. I do not remember it ever being called that, and as an editor, I can say that I have no memories of using that term. Could someone at IEEE in NYC try to call it the same? I did not hear it or remember any document that used it, so I do not know what he is talking about. It was not something I generated, and to have done that would have taken edits. I wonder if Open Group has the full SCCS files. I kept it in SCCS originally and generated some of the documentation Jim needed for IEEE with SCCS commands. ᐧ ᐧ ᐧ On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 10:29 AM Andy Kosela <akosela(a)andykosela.com> wrote: