From the statement it looks like they want the "large language" to standardize "the module language, exception system, s-expression grammar, etc." That would give a standard target for libraries to target, which would make it easier to write libraries and applications that are portable across different popular versions of Scheme.
Good luck, but I confidently predict failure. Lisp attracts language perfectionists, and then differing opinions among perfectionists about what is perfect results in fragmentation. People who are not language perfectionists are more likely to be satisfied with a popular language with glaring deficiencies but lots of reasonably well implemented libraries. Which in my opinion describes the comparison languages in that statement, namely Perl, Python, C, and Ruby.
Good luck, but I confidently predict failure. Lisp attracts language perfectionists, and then differing opinions among perfectionists about what is perfect results in fragmentation. People who are not language perfectionists are more likely to be satisfied with a popular language with glaring deficiencies but lots of reasonably well implemented libraries. Which in my opinion describes the comparison languages in that statement, namely Perl, Python, C, and Ruby.