Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #161726 > unrolled thread

[ OT ] C - Open Standards

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c

Contents

  [ OT ] C - Open Standards Real Troll <real.troll@trolls.com> - 2021-07-08 01:00 +0100
    Re: [ OT ] C - Open Standards Real Troll <real.troll@trolls.com> - 2021-07-08 01:20 +0100
    Re: [ OT ] C - Open Standards "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach@gmail.com> - 2021-07-08 03:53 +0200
      Re: [ OT ] C - Open Standards Real Troll <real.troll@trolls.com> - 2021-07-08 02:30 +0000
    Re: [ OT ] C - Open Standards Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 20:34 -0700
      Re: [ OT ] C - Open Standards David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-07-08 09:18 +0200
        Re: [ OT ] C - Open Standards Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-07-08 00:57 -0700
          Re: [ OT ] C - Open Standards David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-07-08 12:07 +0200
      Re: [ OT ] C - Open Standards Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2021-07-08 10:18 +0200
      Re: [ OT ] C - Open Standards Real Troll <real.troll@trolls.com> - 2021-07-09 03:41 +0100
    Re: [ OT ] C - Open Standards David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-07-08 08:46 +0200
    Re: [ OT ] C - Open Standards Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2021-07-08 08:21 +0000
      Re: [ OT ] C - Open Standards Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2021-07-08 10:31 +0200
      Re: [ OT ] C - Open Standards Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2021-07-08 12:19 +0200
    Re: [ OT ] C - Open Standards Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com> - 2021-07-10 19:47 -0300

#161726 — [ OT ] C - Open Standards

I have managed to find direct links to the official standard and they
are here:

<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1336.pdf>
<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf>
<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf>

I am not sure if there are any official standards after n1336.pdf.
Perhaps there are or perhaps there aren't unless you pay for them. Let
me know if there are any for free use.

Microsoft has defined what Open Standard Means:

> Let's look at what an open standard means: 'open' refers to it being
> royalty-free, while 'standard' means a technology approved by
> formalized committees that are open to participation by all interested
> parties and operate on a consensus basis. _*An open standard is
> publicly available*_, and developed, approved and maintained via a
> collaborative and consensus driven process.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#161727

On 08/07/2021 01:00, Real Troll wrote:
> I have managed to find direct links to the official standard and they
> are here:
>
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1336.pdf>
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf>
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf>
>
> I am not sure if there are any official standards after n1336.pdf.
> Perhaps there are or perhaps there aren't unless you pay for them. Let
> me know if there are any for free use.
>
> Microsoft has defined what Open Standard Means:
>
>> Let's look at what an open standard means: 'open' refers to it being
>> royalty-free, while 'standard' means a technology approved by
>> formalized committees that are open to participation by all interested
>> parties and operate on a consensus basis. _*An open standard is
>> publicly available*_, and developed, approved and maintained via a
>> collaborative and consensus driven process.
>
>
>
>
>
>

I have now found the official download link to "ISO/IEC 9899:2018".� The 
link is here:

<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2310.pdf>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161732

On 8 Jul 2021 02:00, Real Troll wrote:
> I have managed to find direct links to the official standard and they
> are here:
> 
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1336.pdf>
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf>
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf>
> 
> I am not sure if there are any official standards after n1336.pdf.
> Perhaps there are or perhaps there aren't unless you pay for them. Let
> me know if there are any for free use.
> 
> Microsoft has defined what Open Standard Means:
> 
>> Let's look at what an open standard means: 'open' refers to it being
>> royalty-free, while 'standard' means a technology approved by
>> formalized committees that are open to participation by all interested
>> parties and operate on a consensus basis. _*An open standard is
>> publicly available*_, and developed, approved and maintained via a
>> collaborative and consensus driven process.

N1256 (in your list) is the amalgamated C99 + TC1 + TC2 + TC3 document, 
very nice.

I believe N1570 (not in your list) was the last draft of C11.

- Alf

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161735

On 08/07/2021 02:53, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>
> N1256 (in your list) is the amalgamated C99 + TC1 + TC2 + TC3 
> document, very nice.
>
> I believe N1570 (not in your list) was the last draft of C11.
>
>

OK Thanks for informing about N1570. I have found the official download 
link so the complete list is as follows:

<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2310.pdf>
<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1570.pdf>
<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1336.pdf>
<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf>
<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf>

Please let us know if anything else is missing from the list. The next 
standard is 23xx and it won't be approved until 2023 at the latest 
unless something drastic happens in the interim.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161736

Real Troll <real.troll@trolls.com> writes:
> I have managed to find direct links to the official standard and they
> are here:
>
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1336.pdf>
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf>
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf>

No, you've found links to publicly released drafts of the C standard.

N1124 consists of the C99 standard with the first two Technical
Corrigenda merged into it.  It's not particularly useful given the
existence of N1256.

N1256 consists of the C99 standard with the three Technical Corrigenda
merged into it.  It's arguably more useful than the C99 standard itself
(which costs money) -- but of course the C99 standard itself is
officially obsolete.

N1336 is a draft of C201x (later called C11), not useful if you have N1570.

N1570 is the most recent available draft of C11.

I haven't been able to find any public drafts of C17.  After N1570,
there are a number of password protected PDFs that are about the same
size as the standard drafts.  Presumably they're for internal use by the
committee.

N2310 appears to be the earliest draft of the upcoming C202x standard,
and N2956 is probably the latest.  (C202x will probably be C2023.)

All actual C standards cost money.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Philips
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161739

On 08/07/2021 05:34, Keith Thompson wrote:
> Real Troll <real.troll@trolls.com> writes:
>> I have managed to find direct links to the official standard and they
>> are here:
>>
>> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1336.pdf>
>> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf>
>> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf>
> 
> No, you've found links to publicly released drafts of the C standard.
> 
> N1124 consists of the C99 standard with the first two Technical
> Corrigenda merged into it.  It's not particularly useful given the
> existence of N1256.
> 
> N1256 consists of the C99 standard with the three Technical Corrigenda
> merged into it.  It's arguably more useful than the C99 standard itself
> (which costs money) -- but of course the C99 standard itself is
> officially obsolete.
> 
> N1336 is a draft of C201x (later called C11), not useful if you have N1570.
> 
> N1570 is the most recent available draft of C11.
> 
> I haven't been able to find any public drafts of C17.  After N1570,
> there are a number of password protected PDFs that are about the same
> size as the standard drafts.  Presumably they're for internal use by the
> committee.

I have N2176, which is AFAIK the last public draft of C17 (it is titled
"C17 ballot").

> 
> N2310 appears to be the earliest draft of the upcoming C202x standard,
> and N2956 is probably the latest.  (C202x will probably be C2023.)
> 
> All actual C standards cost money.
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161740

David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes:
> On 08/07/2021 05:34, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> Real Troll <real.troll@trolls.com> writes:
>>> I have managed to find direct links to the official standard and they
>>> are here:
>>>
>>> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1336.pdf>
>>> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf>
>>> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf>
>> 
>> No, you've found links to publicly released drafts of the C standard.
>> 
>> N1124 consists of the C99 standard with the first two Technical
>> Corrigenda merged into it.  It's not particularly useful given the
>> existence of N1256.
>> 
>> N1256 consists of the C99 standard with the three Technical Corrigenda
>> merged into it.  It's arguably more useful than the C99 standard itself
>> (which costs money) -- but of course the C99 standard itself is
>> officially obsolete.
>> 
>> N1336 is a draft of C201x (later called C11), not useful if you have N1570.
>> 
>> N1570 is the most recent available draft of C11.
>> 
>> I haven't been able to find any public drafts of C17.  After N1570,
>> there are a number of password protected PDFs that are about the same
>> size as the standard drafts.  Presumably they're for internal use by the
>> committee.
>
> I have N2176, which is AFAIK the last public draft of C17 (it is titled
> "C17 ballot").

My copy, downloaded from
    http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2176.pdf
is password protected.

$ sha1sum n2176.pdf 
1ec16b0171df2036b9aa07e2abae89aa9a6c2e52 *n2176.pdf

(But there are unencrypted copies elsewhere.)

>> N2310 appears to be the earliest draft of the upcoming C202x standard,
>> and N2956 is probably the latest.  (C202x will probably be C2023.)
>> 
>> All actual C standards cost money.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Philips
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161746

On 08/07/2021 09:57, Keith Thompson wrote:
> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes:
>> On 08/07/2021 05:34, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>> Real Troll <real.troll@trolls.com> writes:
>>>> I have managed to find direct links to the official standard and they
>>>> are here:
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1336.pdf>
>>>> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf>
>>>> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf>
>>>
>>> No, you've found links to publicly released drafts of the C standard.
>>>
>>> N1124 consists of the C99 standard with the first two Technical
>>> Corrigenda merged into it.  It's not particularly useful given the
>>> existence of N1256.
>>>
>>> N1256 consists of the C99 standard with the three Technical Corrigenda
>>> merged into it.  It's arguably more useful than the C99 standard itself
>>> (which costs money) -- but of course the C99 standard itself is
>>> officially obsolete.
>>>
>>> N1336 is a draft of C201x (later called C11), not useful if you have N1570.
>>>
>>> N1570 is the most recent available draft of C11.
>>>
>>> I haven't been able to find any public drafts of C17.  After N1570,
>>> there are a number of password protected PDFs that are about the same
>>> size as the standard drafts.  Presumably they're for internal use by the
>>> committee.
>>
>> I have N2176, which is AFAIK the last public draft of C17 (it is titled
>> "C17 ballot").
> 
> My copy, downloaded from
>     http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2176.pdf
> is password protected.
> 
> $ sha1sum n2176.pdf 
> 1ec16b0171df2036b9aa07e2abae89aa9a6c2e52 *n2176.pdf
> 
> (But there are unencrypted copies elsewhere.)
> 

My copy is not protected at all.  (Unsurprisingly, the sha1sum is
different from yours.)  I don't remember where I got it, as it was in
October 2019 - but I am reasonably confident it was from an official
source (such as the wg14 web pages).  Maybe they changed their policies
at some point.

>>> N2310 appears to be the earliest draft of the upcoming C202x standard,
>>> and N2956 is probably the latest.  (C202x will probably be C2023.)
>>>
>>> All actual C standards cost money.
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161743

Am 08.07.21 um 05:34 schrieb Keith Thompson:
> 
> All actual C standards cost money.
> 

Usually, the difference between the latest draft and the official
standard is essentially just some added frontmatter pages. C17 was an
exception, as AFAIK ISO actually made some changes within the standard
document (nothing big, but they moved a comma here and there, which made
the official standard worse than the latest draft, as these commata had
been deliberately placed the way they were in the draft by WG14 to make
the wording unambiguous).

Philipp

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161771

On 08/07/2021 04:34, Keith Thompson wrote:
>
> I haven't been able to find any public drafts of C17.


It looks like the University link has got a copy that is not password 
protected:

<https://teaching.csse.uwa.edu.au/units/CITS2002/resources/n2176.pdf>

I will try keep updating this list so that we have up to date copies 
when ever possible.

<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2310.pdf>
<https://teaching.csse.uwa.edu.au/units/CITS2002/resources/n2176.pdf>
<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1570.pdf>
<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1336.pdf>
<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf>
<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161737

On 08/07/2021 02:00, Real Troll wrote:
> I have managed to find direct links to the official standard and they
> are here:
> 
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1336.pdf>
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf>
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf>
> 
> I am not sure if there are any official standards after n1336.pdf.
> Perhaps there are or perhaps there aren't unless you pay for them. Let
> me know if there are any for free use.
> 

That's a useful list - thanks.

> Microsoft has defined what Open Standard Means:
> 
>> Let's look at what an open standard means: 'open' refers to it being
>> royalty-free, while 'standard' means a technology approved by
>> formalized committees that are open to participation by all interested
>> parties and operate on a consensus basis. _*An open standard is
>> publicly available*_, and developed, approved and maintained via a
>> collaborative and consensus driven process.
> 

As usual, Microsoft has a somewhat different definition from other
people...

"Open standard" usually means that the standard is /available/ to anyone
who wants it - but not necessarily for free.  There are a great many
open standards that are only available for a fee, or if you join the
relevant group.  "Open" in this context means that anyone can get the
standards - there are no restrictions by country, company, contract,
etc.  This also applies to the C and C++ standards, which are published
by ISO - anyone can get the standards, but you have to pay for them.
What is unusual (but /very/ nice) is that the ISO working groups here
publish their drafts at zero cost.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161744

In comp.lang.c++ Real Troll <real.troll@trolls.com> wrote:
> I have managed to find direct links to the official standard and they
> are here:
> 
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1336.pdf>
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf>
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf>

Note that something being directly available for download, even if it's
hosted at the IP owners' own servers, doesn't make it somehow automatically
legal to download if the documents are under a commercial license.
Making something available without technical barriers is not in itself
any sort of implicit free license.

(I don't know if those documents are commercial. Merely pointing out
that fact.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161745

Am 08.07.21 um 10:21 schrieb Juha Nieminen:
> In comp.lang.c++ Real Troll <real.troll@trolls.com> wrote:
>> I have managed to find direct links to the official standard and they
>> are here:
>>
>> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1336.pdf>
>> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf>
>> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf>
> 
> Note that something being directly available for download, even if it's
> hosted at the IP owners' own servers, doesn't make it somehow automatically
> legal to download if the documents are under a commercial license.
> Making something available without technical barriers is not in itself
> any sort of implicit free license.
> 
> (I don't know if those documents are commercial. Merely pointing out
> that fact.)
> 

I understand that the WG14 / ISO copyright situation can be somewhat
complicated (and in the past ISO expressed some dislike about the
existance of that WG14 website). On the other hand, what you write would
hold for any text, website, etc, which is kind of impractical (how do I
know then I am allowed to read your message that I'm replying to here?).

Anyway, those N documents are not meant to be hidden by WG14. There is a
list of them
(http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/wg14_document_log.htm),
which is linked from the WB14 website
(http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/).
AFAIK, it is disputed who own the copyright to the individual N
documents there, and it might even differ by legislation (in particular
there might be US vs. EU law differences).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161747

On 2021-07-08 at 10:21, Juha Nieminen wrote:
> In comp.lang.c++ Real Troll <real.troll@trolls.com> wrote:
>> I have managed to find direct links to the official standard and they
>> are here:
>>
>> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1336.pdf>
>> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf>
>> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf>
> 
> Note that something being directly available for download, even if it's
> hosted at the IP owners' own servers, doesn't make it somehow automatically
> legal to download if the documents are under a commercial license.
> Making something available without technical barriers is not in itself
> any sort of implicit free license.
> 
> (I don't know if those documents are commercial. Merely pointing out
> that fact.)
> 

I am not a lawyer :-), but these papers are not official ISO documents, 
so no commercial license.

Especially humorous is n1256. ISO official documents are the C99 
official standard, plus three separate corrigenda - TC1, TC2, and TC3. 
ISO never published a "corrected" standard, just these four separate 
documents.

In preparation for the C11 work, the committee then produced a "working 
draft" with the TCs applied to the C99 standard. You need to have a base 
document, right? And arguably a lot better than the official one, as the 
bugs have been removed.

However, ISO never published this intermediate version, only the 
completed C11 standard.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161856

On 7/7/21 9:00 PM, Real Troll wrote:
> I have managed to find direct links to the official standard and they
> are here:
> 
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1336.pdf>
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf>
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf>
> 
> I am not sure if there are any official standards after n1336.pdf.
> Perhaps there are or perhaps there aren't unless you pay for them. Let
> me know if there are any for free use.
> 
> Microsoft has defined what Open Standard Means:
> 
>> Let's look at what an open standard means: 'open' refers to it being
>> royalty-free, while 'standard' means a technology approved by
>> formalized committees that are open to participation by all interested
>> parties and operate on a consensus basis. _*An open standard is
>> publicly available*_, and developed, approved and maintained via a
>> collaborative and consensus driven process.
> 
> 

I always return to this page when I need a reference/link to some 
particular C/C++ standard document:

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/81656/where-do-i-find-the-current-c-or-c-standard-documents


--
Cholo Lennon
Bs.As.
ARG

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c

csiph-web