Re: COMMENTARY: The War, or Has Anyone Actually Read ESR?

[Lars Torben Wilson <torben coastnet com>]

Bowie Poag writes:
 > If the consensus is (here on the mailing list, conferences, etc) that the
 > two documents should merge into some sort of formal comprimise, then it
 > will be done, regardless of whether or not I think its a good idea.

I'm glad you said that. I vote for this. Loudly. :) Your terminology
is weak, however. 'Compromise' indicated 'competition', which you are
the only one expounding upon. Each point from the one should be added
to the other; in each case, the strongest one wins within the context
of the rest of the document. This is in no way 'compromise', on any
level. 

 > I find your statement that the "RSG was never intended to be a seperate
 > project." a little hard to believe, Tom.

As far as I, an innocent bystander, could tell, it was intended to be
a repository for ideas proposed by the public until such a time as the
'Official' UISG was made available for public consumption, at which
point ideas (not framework, not outline, IDEAS) from the RSG would be
rehashed in public for possible inclusion in the UISG. Ever since the
RSG was created, this was the premise behind it as I understood it,
and that seemed very clear from the start.

That's just how I read it. Hope this helps. I really hate getting into 
this part of the debate. I've just started losing confidence in this
project as a whole, and I'm desperately hoping that we may one day
have a UISG based on fact and research into UI design, and not opinion 
and politics.

Sorry 'bout that. Couldn't help myself any more.


Torben