[CS-FSLUG] NI: Linux News Responds to Washington Technology Article on OpenDocument

[Ed Hurst]

Ritchie, Josiah S. wrote:

>>Standard: a known and accepted measure, clearly stated for all to see.
> 
> Marketing and Cathedral program companies call this an "Open" standard.
> They have a "Closed" standard. The closed standard drops the last half
> of Ed's definition. This way they can call it a standard and share it
> with a few select individuals that meet their requirements. They also
> blur the "known and accepted" portion to allow more loose fits.

Yup. Of course, the word "standard" arises from it's use as a rallying 
point in battle. One carried a standard which symbolized the identity of 
the combat unit. A soldier knew his standard, but so did the enemy. You 
always knew where your commander was if, in the disorienting fog of war, 
you glanced about to see the emblem. To capture a standard usually 
required capturing the leadership of the unit. The victor kept it as a 
trophy to prove combat worthiness. The whole point was the symbol was 
known. Capturing an ugly brown rag on a stick was of no value, but if 
that was the standard for the most legendary combat unit, you had a real 
trophy.

The very notion of "standard" means "recognized" -- something known, 
something visible, a point of reference. To give it any other meaning is 
the typical torturing language of liars, thieves, and others who cannot 
be accused of holding good intentions. Even in modern history, espionage 
is not on a par with open warfare. Captured soldiers are generally 
treated with a measure of honor, but captured spies are without any such 
hope. Thus, "secret standard" is a complete oxymoron.

-- 
Ed Hurst
----------
Bible Application - http://ed.asisaid.com/bible/index.html
Plain & Simple Computer Help - http://ed.asisaid.com/
Plain Package blog - http://ed.asisaid.com/blog/