Scott G. Miller wrote:
 > It seems crufty as well that the ~xxxxxx@* specifies the number as
 > the character succeding the escape tilde.  That violates the idea that
 > the character following the escape is some sort of command identifier.

That is your idea of format.  The more general idea is that between
the escape and the command character there may be some numeric parameters.

> I'm not so sure we should be writing this SRFI to be compatible with
> Common Lisp or Kawa.  No offsense, but if we have the ability to
> improve, why not?

Offense taken.  While we're not required to be compatible with
Common Lisp, I think a SRFI should avoid being deliberately incompatible
with existing Scheme implementations that are seeing active use and
development, when there is no good reason for the incompatibility.

The Slib and Guile (based on Slib) implementations of format
also support "~@N*".

You really should study and understand the Common Lisp format
specification, and see how SRFI-28 relates.
--
	--Per Bothner
xxxxxx@bothner.com   http://www.bothner.com/per/