Last Tango in fdo (was Re: Tango, Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Desktop)

Adam Jackson ajax at
Fri Nov 11 14:30:11 PST 2005

On Friday 11 November 2005 09:39, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> Dne pá 11. listopadu 2005 00:42 Adam Jackson napsal(a):
> > Which is a bit of an empty directive without actual names of people to go
> > after and brutalize.  So, I must ask the crowd: who out there is actually
> > saying is a formal standardization body capable of
> > enforcing the adoption of technologies or components?
>  I tried to google for some example of that, too bad I can't come up with a
> good query ('find example of people abusing to push their
> spec' kinda doesn't work). Anyway, although I'm quite sure it could be
> possible to find such case, it's not necessary to go as far as people
> deliberately misrepresenting fd.o, the case of some people who can't read
> is sufficient. Many people DO have the perception that is
> exactly what you wrote above. Have you honestly never heard something like
> "but it's a freedesktop standard!"? The word standard alone helps to create
> that perception. And I for sure can see 'standard' written a lot all over

Of course I've heard it.  My point was something along the lines of the people 
who actually think fd.o has that kind of power and make statements to that 
effect are not the people doing useful work anyway so who cares what their 
opinion is.

The point about the use of the word standard is well taken.  Editorial cleanup 
of the wiki would be useful, though that damage may be already done.  And the 
standards.fd.o hostname has to keep working for link preservation reasons.  
But if someone wanted to do the big global search and replace I'd certainly 
cheer them on, and I can probably make a specs.fd.o hostname appear and CNAME 
standards back to that.

> BTW, I also think some of the stuff there should be actually moved to a
> different category - some things like 'System tray protocol' or
> 'startup-notification-spec' are now supported at least by both KDE and
> GNOME and that's IMHO good enough for them to be in the de facto
> adoption/agreement category.

Certainly.  That section of the wiki has needed updating for a while.

- ajax
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : 

More information about the xdg mailing list