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

["Dan \"Effugas\" Kaminsky" <effugas best com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Bowie Poag <bjp@primenet.com>
To: John R Sheets <dusk@smsi-roman.com>
Cc: gnome-gui-list@gnome.org <gnome-gui-list@gnome.org>
Date: Friday, August 07, 1998 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: COMMENTARY: The War, or Has Anyone Actually Read ESR?


>1 <- Point of greatest compliancy (strictly adheres to UISG constn.
guidelines)
>|
>|
>| <- Posesses ALL G2 qualities, plus a little more, but not enough to make
G1.
>2 <- Just barely manages to be deemed G2 compliant.
>|
>|
>|
>3
>| <- Just one or two criteria away from being considered G3 compliant.
>| <- Application posesses about half of the qualities to make G3
compliance.
>| <- Application posesses about one third of the qualities to make G3 comp.
>4 <- Application just meets G4 compliance.
>| <- Just one or two criteria away from being considered G4 compliant.
>|
>|
>5 <- Point of least compliancy (loosely adheres to UISG constn. guidelines)
>
>
>Get the picture?


Did I miss your response to my post somewhere along the line?  Or did you
ignore me?

If #1 is the point of greatest compliancy, your system is more suited to
applications that support less and less.  Think about it, you can add a 6
and it'll mean it doesn't comply even more...add a seven and it's starting
to break some rules, add an 8 and whoa, this thing is terrible, add a 30 and
its author should be banned from ever creating another UI.  (*cough* quark)

If #1 is the point of MINIMUM compliancy, it maintains the import of "do
this or die" but allows additional levels of experimentation.

I'm gonna do some research on this issue.