> What about something like R6RS naming: "Report on the Scheme Core Language" and "Report on the Scheme Standard Libraries" ?  This naming highlights the fact of a core language (WG1) with optional libraries (WG2).

I would slightly prefer `(Revised^7) Report on the {Core,Extended} Scheme Language', because (a) they sound slightly more euphonious (to my tin ear), and (b) calling WG2 the `Extended Scheme Language' seems more in harmony with the WG2 charter (`Working group 2 will develop specifications, documents, and proofs of practical implementability for a language that embodies the essential character of Scheme...'). WG2's product can be `Extended Scheme' even if it specifies a set of libraries.

-- vincent
_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports