May I suggest reserving [CCC] and Re: [CCC] title lines to actual proposals for comments, and actual proposals for amendments thereto, perhaps after a discussion?  Obviously comments on documentation invite substantial discussion -- and that is good, but in time someone will need to edit these documents, and it would be nice if he/she could rely on the headings alone to assure that he/she had the final word on the consensus of the community, without having to browse through extensive discussion.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: MIME :crovira at wt.net > Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2000 11:00 AM
> To: squeak at cs.uiuc.edu
> Subject: Re: [CCC] a few comments on the comments on my comments...
> > > Hello Chris,
> > the var name classes it could assume are a pain to get right post
> implementation. For some things its very difficult to get > right (and that's
> only structural description,) the really hard part is "why?"
> > I think we may very well cause the sources file and change > sets to become huge.
> So what? :-)
> > -Charles-A.
> > "Norton, Chris" wrote:
> > > Hi!
> >
> > Dwight Hughes [SMTP:dwighth at ipa.net] wrote:
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > "Believe me, I would like to see things go far beyond what > they are now (and
> > I have a number of ideas of what and how), but all of that > is just smoke and
> > noise until we create the core documentation to begin with."
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > Here here!  You are doing a fine, contentious job Dwight!  > More power to you
> > and many thanks from me!
> >
> > Although Mr. Rovira has some good points, a lot of > formalism can be added
> > post-factum.  In particular, I think an > auto-comment-generator (see Dan &
> > Vassili's ideas in that direction) should be added to Squeak
> > _in_addition_to_ the traditional, hand-crafted comments.  > Then we'll get our
> > cake and eat it too.
> >
> > Thanks for your helpful additions to Squeak!
> >
> > ---==> Chris
> >
> > PS>  I particularly liked your 2nd definition of Object!  Nice job.
> > > >