<Bruce Badger>
Alan,

If you are going to be at Smalltalk Solutions this year perhaps we can talk
about Smalltalk portability.  My hope is that libraries such as Passport and
Sport melt away as the ANSI standard moves to cover more areas so every year
I lobby the Cincoms and GemStones of the world to re-engage in the ANSI
process every year - but if we could harangue them together, that would be
good :-)
</Bruce Badger>

I'd really like to attend, but that's just not going to be possible this
year.

I'd also really like to talk with you about inter-Smalltalk portability.
Although I generally prefer VW personally, I also strongly believe that
multiple, different Smalltalk implementations (including both commercial and
open-source platforms) are necessary to the success of Smalltalk.  I also
believe that Smalltalk is not in a position where it can afford the luxury
of any significant disunity.  United we stand, divided we fall.

Standards, and avoiding unnecessary differences in APIs, or in underlying
computational models, are key components of having a unified Smalltalk
community.  So is respect for prior art.  And in that vein, I'd like to also
mention Chris Uppal's "Common Smalltalk" project:
http://commonsmalltalk.wikispaces.com/

I do wonder whether an ANSI-governed effort at Smalltalk standardization is
the right approach, though.  Although I was overall quite pleased with the
work of the ANSI X3J20 Smalltalk committee (a former co-worker of mine, Doug
Surber, was on that committee--and he was responsible for the DateAndTime
and Duration protocols, interestingly enough,) I was not at all impressed by
the response of the Smalltalk vendors/implementors to the ANSI Standard.  To
this day, VW still fails to conform to the ANSI Standard in ways for which
there is no good excuse (e.g., try evaluating "$a codePoint" in a "virgin"
VW image--and that is just one example among many--although to be fair, the
X3J20 committee did not respect prior art in some cases--and
Character>>codePoint is a case in point.)

And then there's the amount of time it takes to get a new ANSI Standard
finalized.  Perhaps a private group of "concerned citizens" could get things
done more quickly.  "If you want something done, do it yourself."

Is it possible that a small group of those with the necessary skills, time,
interest and commitment could define **and implement** a standard Smalltalk
library for most Smalltalk platforms?  Can we "just do it" in the hope that
"build it and they will come" is more than just a catchy phrase?

--Alan