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

Re: You call that a standard?

• To: xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: You call that a standard?
• From: Alexander Jerusalem <ajerulists@v...>
• Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 17:58:16 +0100
• In-reply-to: <830178CE7378FC40BC6F1DDADCFDD1D1D519E0@R...>
• References: <830178CE7378FC40BC6F1DDADCFDD1D1D519E0@R...>
• User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (Windows/20040207)

I don't agree at all. If a term has many meanings, that doesn't make 
it's meaningless. To deny this, is just a way of avoiding a necessary 
debate. A standard is a set of more or less strict rules that are known 
by a common name by which different parties can refer to it. And I 
think, you accept that every day for all practical purposes.


Dare Obasanjo wrote:

> The word "standard' when it comes to software and computer technology is usually meaningless. Is something standard if it produced by a standards body but has no conformance tests (e.g. SQL)? What if it has conformance testing requirements but is owned by a single entity (e.g. Java)? What if it is just widely supported with no formal body behind it (e.g. RSS)? 
>  
> Whenever I hear someone say standard it's as meaningless to me as when I hear the acronym 'SOA', it means whatever the speaker wants it to mean. 
>  

• References:
  • RE: You call that a standard?
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: You call that a standard?
• Next by Date: RE: You call that a standard?
• Previous by thread: RE: You call that a standard?
• Next by thread: RE: You call that a standard?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread