Re: PROPOSAL: UISG Compliancy Level Standardization, Revision 3

["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: Tuesday, August 11, 1998 2:00 AM
Subject: Re: PROPOSAL: UISG Compliancy Level Standardization, Revision 3


>Bad idea.

Bowie--I KNOW you don't see it like this, but you're Pronouncements that
things are Bad Ideas are *really* bad.  Just leave these two words out.
Imagine how they would sound if spoken.

"<Breath, sigh of 'why doesn't this person have a clue'><roll eyes as words
are spoken><lower head>Bad idea.<Raise head, as if an effort, breathing in
deeply as if this was an action that had to be repeated 100 times and you're
hoping maybe this time your wisdom will be understood>"

That's how you sound when your words are expanded into a scene.

> Youre trying to encompass every possible GNOME application under
>the definition of "GNOME Compliant". Thats not what were trying to do
>here. Experimental apps are simply experimental apps. Theyre simply not
>compliant, since they havent met the basic set of qualifications for even
>the lowest level of compliancy.


Here's where you are *wrong*, Bowie.  I can have an app that's purely
experimental, or I can have a GC4 app that actually integrates one or two
experimental features.

That's why I don't like GC5 as the "experimental" category.  Something John
has done that's pretty interesting is separate GC1 as a universal category
that *all* UI's should fulfill, and GC2 as the first GNOME category, which
then shifts GC2, GC3, and GC4 into GC3, GC4, and GC5.  Is this a good thing?
Unsure.

Features that are in development should not be able to be used as a club by
one app against another.  Experimental does not connote better.  This is
Good.

>Not everyone is under the umbrella when it comes to compliancy.


I disagree.  (Isn't that nicer than Bad Idea, btw?)  Everybody can be under
the umbrella, if only in a minimal status.  We can still require
experimental apps to die if they appear to be dead, for instance.