> Bradd W. Szonye wrote:
>> Stand-alone naming standards almost always fail unless there's an
>> enforcement mechanism to mandate use, and finalization is wholly
>> inappropriate for naming standards, which must evolve with use in
>> order to remain usable. How do you plan to address those major
>> issues?

xxxxxx@freenetproject.org wrote:
> Can you name some examples?

If you need me to name examples, then you have no business publishing a
naming standard. Seriously!

>> While your optimism is admirable, you're largely ignoring the advice
>> of two QA experts who are trying to warn you of major problems, and
>> you're even ignoring the advice of the SRFI process itself. That's
>> not a good sign -- it strongly suggests that you're too eager to
>> release the document whether it's ready or not.

> I'm ignoring the SRFI process because I understand what its goals are.

It's because of this attitude that you're taking so much heat. You keep
making this claim that the rules don't apply to you, because your
proposal is special.

> I'm quite ready to see it done right ....

Then why are you completely ignoring the advice of QA experts?
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd