also sprach Pierre Habouzit <madco...@madism.org> [2009.08.06.1104 +0200]: > You're comparing apples and oranges here, for HTML is a standard, > and theoretically, following the standard is enough (and even that > is probably -- and sadly -- a fallacy).
LSB is growing to be just that, but it won't stand a chance if people/distros don't work with it. > When it comes to the LSB, it doesn't say what happens when you're > using very specific bits of the Linux kernel or the GNU libc, and > when you're doing networking stuff for example, well, that matters > a lot. That's why LSB doesn't work for many vendors because of > the very different toolchains. I am failing to accept that vendors need to use those very specific things in their software, just like I doubt that people need IE-HTML to make their sites render properly. I think laziness^W business thinking is more likely an option. Anyway, if there is something that should be standardised, well, bring it up to the LSB. The W3C and web-standards groups didn't suggest to synchronise the rendering engines between all browsers. They defined standards. I think that's what we ought to do too. -- .''`. martin f. krafft <madd...@d.o> Related projects: : :' : proud Debian developer http://debiansystem.info `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck http://vcs-pkg.org `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems "this sentence contradicts itself -- no actually it doesn't." -- douglas hofstadter
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
