On 8 Oct 2025, at 15:47, Peter McGoron <xxxxxx@mcgoron.com> wrote:

> On 10/7/25 01:45, Daphne Preston-Kendal wrote:
>> This SRFI needlessly throws the legitimacy of such authorial library name assignments into question. Arthur, I think as SRFI editor you ought to step in here and at the very least prevent this from happening. It would be damaging to the SRFI process to allow any doubt to be sown about whether such names are valid references.
>
> SRFI-97 already disposes of author-chosen names:
>
> > Some authors specified names that should be used for libraries. These names are not used here. Instead, a consistent naming scheme is used that happens to differ from the authors' originally chosen names.
>
> For example, SRFI-97 changes the name of SRFI-1 from "list-lib" to "lists".
>
> I don't think this is a good idea, but SRFI-97 was finalized in December 2008, and it's conventions are followed (Thunderchez, chez-srfi, Larceny for examples). This SRFI isn't doing anything on the naming front that hasn't already been done by SRFI-97.

Those SRFI names predated the R6RS library naming conventions; Olin seems to have assumed that library names would be single identifiers, not a hierarchy formed by lists of identifiers (and exact integers).

I also refer to MNW’s email from earlier today, which is also relevant to this objection.

Daphne