Peter,

On 2025-10-08 13:55 -0400, Peter McGoron wrote:
> SRFI-97 has explicit wording on sublibraries that fixes this
> problem. This SRFI should include it, I didn't even realize it
> didn't.

Thanks, I overlooked this.  Including similar text in SRFI 261 would
help solve the problem of SRFIs like 146 that provide several
sublibraries which export the same identifiers.

I'm still mildly concerned that SRFIs 261 (and 97) suggest monolithic
library structures, when the SRFIs they name leave this organizational
question open.

--
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe  <xxxxxx@sigwinch.xyz>