[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: To be a standard or not to be a standard

• To: "'Keith W. Boone'" <keith@w...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: To be a standard or not to be a standard
• From: "Boyse, Jim" <Jim_Boyse@f...>
• Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 14:15:28 -0500

-----Original Message-----
From: Keith W. Boone [mailto:keith@w...]
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 2:03 PM
To: xml-dev@l...
Subject: RE: To be a standard or not to be a standard

I get a little tired of the pendantry on this list, so I looked up "standard" in the American Heritage Dictionary, just to satisfy the pendantic:

 

There are maybe two or three definitions that could be applied in this discussion:

n.    5.a. A degree or level or requirement, excellence, or attainment.

adj. 2. Widely recognized as a model of authority or excellence: a standard reference work.

adj. 5. Commonly used or supplied: standard car equipment

 

There is one other that might also apply, especially to some recommendations or products:

adj. 3. Acceptable, but of less than top quality: a standard grade of beef.

 

    Keith

 

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less."  -- Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass

**Disclaimer**

This memo and any attachments may be confidential and legally privileged.

If you are not the intended recipient and have received this in error,

kindly destroy this message and notify the sender.

Thank you for your assistance.

• Prev by Date: RE: dtds, schemas, xhtml, and multimedia technologies
• Next by Date: RE: RDF was a bully (was Re: RDF and the new releases)
• Previous by thread: Re: To be a standard or not to be a standard
• Next by thread: Re: To be a standard or not to be a standard
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread