Text 1282, 54 rader
Skriven 2008-03-22 20:17:39 av mark lewis (1:3634/12.0)
   Kommentar till text 1270 av Frank Reid (258.fidoftscpubl)
Ärende: Nomination
==================
 > The main job of the FTSC is to make the life of the *developers*
 > easier by documenting the standards that their products have to 
 > comply with.

 FR> That's kind of my point.  Wouldn't the *user* of the software be
 FR> more apt to steer the requirements rightly? 

no... have you or anyone else been able to steer m$ into creating a truely
bugfree and secure operating system? :P

 FR> In that context, you could make a more compelling argument that 
 FR> *developers* shouldn't hold FTSC positions.  

i dunno about that... based on history and past experience, i can see a greater
benefit of having developers in the FTSC than i can having the average joe who
has no clue ;)

it also provides developers an "advance" indicator on being able to implement
and discuss ideas that could become FTN standards... sure, it is a "leg up" for
the developers but they are the ones who created this network and its
capabilities, after all... the politicians, on the other hand, served only to
restrict its growth and affectively run off the developers... in many cases
because of their hounding and attempts to restrict the development of new
features and capabilities...

i watched and saw the type-3 and type-10 proposals go no damned where due to
the activities of the politicians in fidonet at that time... hell, i even
contributed something to both of those base PKT-type proposals... AIR, both of
them also had several methods of implementation, too ;)

Mark Kimes, Jason Steck, Mikael Ståldal, and Robert Heller are some of the
first names that come to my mind of that period... in fact, i can count 5
different PKT type proposals from the 1990-1995 time period... one of those is
a RFC822 compliant proposal from 1990, three type-3 proposals and one
type-10... at least one of those type-3 proposals was developed over the period
of several years... i specifically recall providing some feedback on at least
one (other?) PKT type proposal that carried messages with "containers" in their
message bodies... these containers gave the ability to transport binary data of
several formats... still graphics, video, and sound are three that i definitely
recall being in the proposal... i just can't find this in my old library :? but
you can imagine the whooo and hollar and the populace when this particular
proposal came to light :? :? :?

oh yeah... most all of these proposals? they made their first appearances in
the NET_DEV echo where many developers hung out... they were presented there
for feedback and further development assistance... once they "passed" those in
NET_DEV, then they were presented to the FTSC as proposals... from there, it
was up to the developers to implement and put into widespread use those
proposals that they and their users wanted implemented and put into widespread
use...

)\/(ark

 * Origin:  (1:3634/12)