NICE-ESG-Libs Digest Mon, 5 Jun 95 Volume 1 : Issue 235
Today's Topics:
PELKS 8 - Is there a motion?
NICE Eiffel Standards Group -- Library Committee Mailing List
To post to list:
NICE-ESG-Libs@atlanta.twr.com
To send mail to the Chairman of the committee:
NICE-ESG-Libs-chair@atlanta.twr.com
Administrative matters (sign up, unsubscribe, mail problems, etc):
NICE-ESG-Libs-request@atlanta.twr.com
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 95 15:03:29 -0400
From: Jason Schroeder
Subject: PELKS 8 - Is there a motion?
To: NICE Library Committee
Fellow members,
I, as well, find the promotion tactics of PELKS 8 objectionable. In
essence, the desire of the chairman is for the committee to rubber
stamp this one.
There is no motion on the table. Further discussion without a
motion is useless. Let's spell it out please. When we say YES
what are we saying YES to? If there really is no motion and it is
just an opinion poll for the purposes of making an announcement
that sounds like the committee was involved, I dissent.
I suggest the committee not be mowed over by the actions of the
vendors. If there is going to be an announcement, let it say
that the vendors have come to a meeting of the minds. If we want
to tell a polite fib to the world let's do it and sort through
everything on Thursaday.
I am not naive: Eiffel needs exposure AND the vendors needs sales.
Let the announcement say what it needs to say, but the committee
should not commit itself for some short term publicity or for
the ever-present politcal purposes. I would hate for any of us
to agree to something to turn around and go backwards on what we
said because of convenience or haste.
PELKS = Proposed Eiffel Library Kernel Standard? We have two days
to decide whether the eighth revision of this proposal is supposed
to be promoted to the one true Eiffel Library Standard?
With frustration and sadness, I am against promoting PELKS to
anything more than it already is.
It seems apparent to me the real issue here is this "annoucement"
not the opinion of the library committee. What is the draft
announcement anyways? I am really interested to know what the rush
is about!
Christine> These recent discussions and the outcome have not been intended
Christine> in any way to take the place of the library committee
Christine> process. Indeed, I agree with Steve Tynor's recent comment that
Christine> it's a pity this couldn't have happened openly on the
Christine> committee. Let's hope vintage '95 will be a good basis for the
Christine> future.
I totally disagree. They have taken the place of the committee and
we are being told we have two days to say "YES". It is a travesty
this has occurred outside the committee. I am curious whether
these actions truly demonstrate how low the committee's involvement
and opinions are esteemed...I will not waste the committee's time
today with this, but I intend to bring this up later.
Jason Schroeder
P.S. I do not see a vote on Pelks 7 anywhere, but somehow I find that is
not an issue for today either.
|
|
