Updating the WG2 Wiki

[Peter McGoron]

The previous WG2 meeting had some impromptu discussion about the
process. Some people were confused about the organization of the
R7RS-Large process, about the division of the Foundations, and the
assignment of topics to Fascicles.

I have updated the front page of the wiki
<https://codeberg.org/scheme/r7rs/wiki/Home> with more information about
the division and progress of the R7RS-Large. A lot of this information
was scattered around the repo without any links, so I hope by bringing
it to the front page people can have a good idea of what's going on and
where things are headed.

I have also written up some ideas about how to better organize meetings
and delegate responsibility here
<https://codeberg.org/scheme/r7rs/wiki/phm-Process-Organization-Proposal>
Comments welcomed.

-- Peter McGoron

[Alaric Snell-Pym]

On 10/03/2026 00:31, 'Peter McGoron' via scheme-reports-wg2 wrote:
> The previous WG2 meeting had some impromptu discussion about the
> process. Some people were confused about the organization of the R7RS-
> Large process, about the division of the Foundations, and the assignment
> of topics to Fascicles.
>
> I have updated the front page of the wiki <https://codeberg.org/scheme/
> r7rs/wiki/Home> with more information about the division and progress of
> the R7RS-Large. A lot of this information was scattered around the repo
> without any links, so I hope by bringing it to the front page people can
> have a good idea of what's going on and where things are headed.

Fantastic! I've long said the success of a wiki depends on there being
somebody who keeps the front page relevant :-)

> I have also written up some ideas about how to better organize meetings
> and delegate responsibility here <https://codeberg.org/scheme/r7rs/wiki/
> phm-Process-Organization-Proposal> Comments welcomed.

I had a similar thought to your proposed initial committees - that we
basically have a pipeline:

1. The community raises issues (or emails us and we raise issues on
their behalf)
2. There's some discussion around the issue and categorisation and so
on, ideally to encourage interested parties to elaborate and add their
thoughts
3. It gets allocated to a meeting (currently we're going through the
facsicles but I imagine at the end of Foundations we'll need to come
back and go over things that have arisen in each to finish them off)
4. We talk about it, and vote, which should be minuted AND then recorded
in the ticket (linking back to the minutes)
5. (potentially some time later, to allow related issues to be resolved)
it's written into the specification

...and your committees basically carve up the two blocks of
out-of-meetings work in steps 1-2 and 5.

>
> -- Peter McGoron
>

Thanks,

--
Alaric Snell-Pym (M0KTN neé M7KIT)
http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/alaric/

[Aisi Zhu]

Hi Peter.

There's an initial draft of Procedural Fascicle, and former WG2 had approved to publish it as draft 1 in meeting https://codeberg.org/scheme/r7rs/wiki/Agenda+2025-10-28.-

I have update the homepage to add a link to the source code of that draft.

By the way, I think release that draft is a low-hanging goal for current WG2. What does everybody think?

[Aisi Zhu]

ouch, sorry, I missed there's already a link to it. 

[Peter McGoron]

> By the way, I think release that draft is a low-hanging goal for
current WG2. What does everybody think?

I would have no objection to it, but

1. I assume only DPK has the ability to push things to the R7RS website.
2. The procedural fascicle has some things that need to be modified
before the draft goes out (like the procedure the solves the halting
problem[1]).
3. I have no idea how the .txt file gets rendered into PDF/HTML. The
repository is filled with out-of-date junk.

-- Peter McGoron

[1]:
https://codeberg.org/scheme/r7rs/src/commit/23dd77892a1592774b9bff2ffe6ab5b1e6ed7b77/fascicles/procedural-fascicle.txt#L886

[Peter McGoron]

I have learned a bit more about the fascicle file format, and have a
busted version of the procedural fascicle compiling.

The instructions and patched version are available

https://codeberg.org/phm/r7rs

If anyone wants to compile and look at them.

-- Peter McGoron

[Peter McGoron]

I have hosted an HTML render of the current state of the Procedural
Fascicle on my website:

https://florida.moe/r7rs/2026-03-16/editors-introduction-to-this-fascicle.html

-- Peter McGoron

[Daphne Preston-Kendal]

On 17 Mar 2026, at 11:51, 'Peter McGoron' via scheme-reports-wg2 <scheme-re...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

> I have hosted an HTML render of the current state of the Procedural Fascicle on my website:
>
> https://florida.moe/r7rs/2026-03-16/editors-introduction-to-this-fascicle.html

Wow! Well done and thank you.


Daphne

[Daphne Preston-Kendal]

On 15 Mar 2026, at 18:45, 'Peter McGoron' via scheme-reports-wg2 <scheme-re...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

> > By the way, I think release that draft is a low-hanging goal for current WG2. What does everybody think?
>
> I would have no objection to it, but
>
> 1. I assume only DPK has the ability to push things to the R7RS website.

Anyone with push access to the scheme/r7rs repo can push. At the moment, this is Arthur, John, Marc N-W, Mike Sperber, Vincent Manis, and me. I would have no problem in principle with adding more people with commit.

> 2. The procedural fascicle has some things that need to be modified before the draft goes out (like the procedure the solves the halting problem[1]).

Ah, someone spotted it ;-)

> 3. I have no idea how the .txt file gets rendered into PDF/HTML. The repository is filled with out-of-date junk.

Daphne

[Peter McGoron]

> Wow! Well done and thank you.

You're welcome!

I've fixed most of the markup errors and wrote up a simple introduction
and acknowledgements. I have also removed components requiring
hypercomputation. The rendered new release is at:

https://florida.moe/r7rs/2026-03-17/editors-intro-procedural.html

I don't know how much more there is to do for the actual release. There
are a few TODO's in the body that I don't know how to address.

-- Peter McGoron