Dee As Standard

Hi! I was just wondering... why nobody has submitted a Dee-based language (like for example TutorialDee) to an standards body like Ecma, or ISO... wouldn't that help with its adoption? What would happen if, someone did it... (could I do it?)

Imagine if someone just takes the description of TutorialDee from the books and tries to submit it as an EcmaStandard? (like CeeSharp) would he (or she) had copyright problems with the authors of TheThirdManifesto ? if not, why none of the DeeImplementors? has done it? (is it expensive? too complicated? perceived to be pointless/worthless?)

Before we commit, let's see if we can fix the oddities of D first, such as the prefix/infix confusion.

{Be careful to distinguish D from Tutorial D. D is an abstract specification of the characteristics a "good" database language should have. It does not specify any syntax, let alone use of prefix vs. infix operators. Tutorial D is a specific example of a D which is intended to be an illustrative teaching tool -- and therefore demonstrates a variety of syntax options -- rather than be practical, ideal, consistent, or even complete. As such, there isn't any "confusion" to fix -- except perhaps among a handful of students. Implementations are free to use whatever syntax they like, as long as the D specification is not violated. My Rel2 (see the RelProject) implementation of TutorialDee, for example, added infix versions of the defined prefix operators.}

{It's likely that no D implementor has submitted a specification to a standards body because all the implementations (of which I'm aware) are still considered in-development moving targets. Wait a few years for one or more implementations to stabilise, and then it may be different.} -- DaveVoorhis