I think the system where identifiers of different "levels" are clearly
separated is the cleanest one, but I share Keith's concern that the
semantics of the system are expressed unclearly in the document.  The
"infiniteness" of the "reflective tower" (which is a concept that itself
would need some clarification) seems to point towards the fact that
every let-syntax form may have inner let-syntax forms whose definitions
don't have anything to do with the definitions of the enclosing
let-syntax.  Adding a clarification like this, and some mention about
what "levels" (or metalanguages) actually are, would IMO clarify the
SRFI.

Panu

--
personal contact: xxxxxx@iki.fi, +35841 5323835, +3589 85619369
work contact: xxxxxx@helsinki.fi, +35850 3678003
kotisivu (henkkoht):	http://www.iki.fi/atehwa/
homepage (technical):	http://sange.fi/~atehwa/