Denis Washington made the following proposal for the names of the variants of Scheme defined by WG1 and WG2:
I know it is a bit early to discuss this, but as I saw that this was mentioned again recently in the scheme-reports mailing list (in the context of module naming), I quickly wanted to write up a proposal of how the WG1 and WG2 standards could be named in the future.
First of all, I think that it is expected by many that what will end up being WG1 Scheme should labeled the actual "Scheme" programming language
Scheme: a language that is minimal but practical. Also, WG1 is the only document that has mandatory language features, so it natural to still name every implementation that implements these features as a complete Scheme implementation.
Following this line of thought, WG2's all-optional modules and rules can be thought of as "extensions" to the core language, but extensions that are agreed up on (as opposed to implementation-specific).
So in summary, I'd like to propose the following names for the WG1 documents:
WG1: *Report on the Algorithmic Language Scheme, Revised 2011* (abbr.: RS11)
WG2: *Report on Standard Extensions to the Algorithmic Language Scheme, Revised 2011* (abbr.: RSES11; alternatively, "[...] Commobn Extensions [...]", abbr. RCES11; should probably be "Published 2011" as there is no original document to revise.)
The standard module namespace could then be moved from (scheme ...) to,
I hope this proposal is helpful.
Regards, Denis Washington