Re: Standard Library Interest?

["Robert I. Eachus" <rieachus@comcast.net>]

Stephane Richard wrote:

> However I think we should have a basis for a structure to suggest first.  So
> on your other post to Martin, when you say to create a structure of names
> (atleast) I'd say you're right :-)..if not anything else, a text file that
> represents an image of a possible end product perhaps?  That wouldn't be too
> long too do.  Atleast we'd all see (and be able to agree on) a given layout.
> For that I have to agreewith you :-).

It would be nice to have a good proposal and presentation in shape for 
the WG9 meeting in San Diego, and get it on the agenda.  As I have said, 
I think the right approach is to keep the standards related part of this 
small:  An on-line registry of top-level library names.  But notice that 
once you go the standards route, there are potential political issues 
hiding all around.

In this case, I think the right approach is to have a registry which for 
all practical purposes is a de facto listing of all the library names 
that are being used.  But the "official" list would have to pass up the 
approval chain through WG9 every so often, and there would have to be 
procedures for dealing with conflicting registrations and so on.  In 
other words, a search of the list would return all known names that 
matched, with probably a one word status: Registered, Pending, Rejected, 
Withdrawn, Unknown, Delisted.

If I were doing it I would probably set up a nominal registration fee 
for top level names.  It should be small enough not to pain those who 
are doing the registration to contribute to the community, and 
high-enough so that if a cyber-squatter wants to try it, he can fund the 
whole operation, including the clerical overhead of rejecting most or 
all of his requests. ;-)  Or we could just have a rule about the number 
of top level libraries registered by one person or corporation.

If we work at it, it could be in place and working by the San Diego 
meeting on a provisional basis, then Marin can file a registration 
application for CAL that states the current contents and the rules for 
adding to it.  St�phane can register SAL, ACT can register GNAT, and so 
on.  (If I get a vote on who gets approved, I'm going to look for 
libraries that exist, are well documented, include unit tests, and are 
useful.  So get busy. ;-)

-- 
                                         Robert I. Eachus

"Quality is the Buddha. Quality is scientific reality. Quality is the 
goal of Art. It remains to work these concepts into a practical, 
down-to-earth context, and for this there is nothing more practical or 
down-to-earth than what I have been talking about all along...the repair 
of an old motorcycle."  -- from Zen and the Art of Motorcycle 
Maintenance by Robert Pirsig