"nemesis" <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> From: Charles C
> > I think we'll be hard
> > pressed to find a single standard that won't turn most people away.
>
> How something optional like the metrics standard could possibly turn people
> away?  I say, let people wanting a metric standard to discuss metric
> standard matters, let people wanting to address other issues address other
> issues and let people just wanting to contribute something they created
> contribute it without any metrics consideration whatsoever.

I was responding in the context of what I read Ben Chambers to be saying...
Ben, you tell me if this is right...  If I read it right, by "sticking to
our guns" I think Ben meant non-optional standards.  So, submissions which
do not follow x-standard should not be accepted at all, (Is that what you
meant Ben?) and that those who want to share something non-standard can do
so the old-fashioned way, (i.e. on the newsgroup or on their own web page).

I like standards, don't get me wrong.  I think in terms of making standards
for my own stuff too.  In a community thing where participation isn't
always easy to come by I think some flexibility is important.  Forcing a
few additions like adding flags is a lot easier than say, turning a dozen
related files into hundreds in order to qualify.

Charles

Post a reply to this message