TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Classic View

Use Proportional Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender: "Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 12:36:43 -0400
Reply-To: Michael Feldman <[log in to unmask]>
From: Michael Feldman <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <v01540b01b594e52ff607@[63.30.166.58]> from "Hal Hart" at Jul 14, 2000 09:10:20 AM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
MIME-Version: 1.0
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (27 lines)
[said Hal]
>
> How the industry has changed in a decade if a group like this is now split
> on and debating whether MS "standards" are standards in any sense
> commensurate with other (legitmate) definitions.

Boy, that's for sure! Of all people, _Ada_ folks should know the
difference between a standard and a proprietary "standard".
>
> An oft-cited joke line is "The great thing about standards is how many
> there are to choose from."  I've often wondered how many people hearing
> that realize that it IS a joke, a back-handed criticism of how corrupted
> the term "standard" has become, ironically destroying the essence of the
> term's meaning and thwarting the pure objectives of standardization in most
> cases.
>
>      -hh
>
Exactly. It is not mere Microsoft-bashing for us to understand the
difference, and at least try to use terms properly. You can like
Microsoft or not, but the issue is their distortion of the term
"standard". We simply do not have to buy in to that!

(up above, I said "Ada" - this keeps us on-topic in Team-Ada.:-))

Mike

ATOM RSS1 RSS2