Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt(_at_)gulbrandsen(_dot_)priv(_dot_)no> writes:
Keith Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu>
sounds more like: if you can't manage to do things well, standardize the
stupidity and claim that you like it that way.
Or "if you can't manage to do things well, standardize the best you can".
"the least bad", if you wish.
Indeed so. If some non-standardized protocol is out in the wild, and
acquiring new features in a haphazard manner, and if it contains at least
some features of merit, then standardizing it may well enable some control
of the situation (e.g. by deprecating the worst features, clarifying
intentions, resolving inconsistencies, discouraging competitive protocols,
Whether Precedence comes into this I don't know, but it is at least
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl(_at_)clw(_dot_)cs(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk Snail: 5
Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5