Re: language support

["hursh" <hursh@sparc.isl.net>]

---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Ronen Tzur <rtzur@shani.net>
Reply-To: xarchon-l@seul.org
Date:  Wed, 20 Mar 2002 16:50:10 -0500

>Hi Dan,
>
>The related info pages for glibc mention that the "catgets" family of 
>functions are defined by an X/Open standard, and that is the only standard 
>for translation.  GNU gettext is not standard-compliant, but it is compatible 
>with Sun's gettext (which isn't standard-compliant either).  You could say 
>both are a de-facto standard, which is good enough.

defacto is good enogh for me.

>About standards, that's something you put in paper for all to see and 
>implement, rather than something you code -- thus licenses are irrelevant.
>Consider XFree for example:  an implementation of The Open Group's X11 
>standard, and licensed under the MIT license.

True enough, but I usually don't consider something standard if it is changing too often (subjective, I know) or if it is standard just because someone published it, even though nobody else has acknowledged it.  I could write a white paper or a sample implementation of some sort and get my bowling team to approve it, but I think it might be a bit much to call it a standard based on that.  
	I guess I should have asked if it was a stable and well accepted standard.  Of course I thought that was the standard definition of a standard.  
:^)

Dan