Re: Standardization process

On 2024-09-18 17:39, dxf wrote:

On 18/09/2024 8:51 pm, Ruvim wrote:

On 2024-09-18 14:16, dxf wrote:

On 18/09/2024 5:07 pm, Ruvim wrote:

On 2024-09-18 07:39, dxf wrote:
...
>

Their role on the TC is to ensure
nothing jeopardizes their investment.  It's impossible to have spent
20 years 'standardizing' and have achieved so little.

>
This critics is absolutely fruitless. No one owes you to develop
any specifications unless you pay for it. Whether some people have
achieved much or little is their own business.

>
When the ANS-TC sat, they did consider it their business and priority.

>
And what?  Anybody can claim that.

 Not many can back it up with a 200+ page technical document.
>

I've made that choice.

>
It seems, despite your choice, the Forth standardization process that

is based on the forth-standard.org platform still bothers your.
 Why do I talk about the Standard?  It's kind of unavoidable in technical
discussions when forthers have been suckled on it.

It's okay to talk about the standard and the standardization process (how to make them better), to talk about what you would like to see in the standard, or what you think should be destandardized.
But critics about how much time something took, or how much personal time participants devote to this activity is nonsense.

 

Then why don't you want to take part?

 Perhaps because I've seen your success rate :)
 

If you share my position, you could help me to convince other )
The standardization process cannot move forward without reaching consensus at every step. To reach consensus, we should convince other participants that some change or new thing worth standardizing. And we should find/use many different constructive arguments for that.
--
Ruvim