Snitches & Activity

[Peter Salus]

Submitted-by: peter at world.std.com (Peter Salus)

I didn't respond to jsq's poll.  Now that the results have been posted,
I'd like to make my position known.

(1) I didn't think the manner of polling was in any way 
	appropriate.  On the one hand, many individuals
	concerned with IT standards don't get the news 
	groups, on the other hand, many members of the 
	various associations (USENIX, UniForum, IEEE, 
	EUUG, etc.) don't care about standards reports.

(2) I thought the poll questions and methodology were 
	slanted and unscientific.  The fact (noted in
	some comments) that there was no option for 
	no response/don't care/don't know is part of 
	this.  The regression to the mean in most 
	responses is evidence of just how badly 
	designed the poll was.

(3) The paltry number of responses shows that even the 
	majority of POSIX and X3 attendees didn't care 
	about the questions.

(4) I like the snitch reports.  I don't think that either 
	John Quarterman or Jeff Haemer does an adequate job 
	where the postings and the articles in ;login: are 
	concerned.  I would like to see the snitch reports 
	reduced in size to no more than 4-6 pp. in a quarterly
	issue where POSIX is concerned; a page where 1201
	is concerned; a page on WG15; etc.  I think that if
	jsq & jsh are to do a job, it should be to filter 
	the trash before it hits the printer.  Editing is 
	more than merely spelling and punctuation and cute 
	asides.

(5) I'd like to see more on the unmentioned ISO bodies:
	what's gone on at the recent meetings of JTAP,
	for example? [Joint Technical Committee on 
	Application Portability].  They met in Copenhagen
	in February and should be meeting about now in Ottawa.
	
I think I need yet another newsletter about as much as I 
need another of Dave Yost's wooden nickles.

-- 
The difference between practice and theory in practice is always
greater than the difference between practice and theory in theory. 

Volume-Number: Volume 21, Number 106