On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Andrew Dalke <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Feb 19, 2010, at 9:23 AM, Egon Willighagen wrote:
>> Freedom to redistribute and modify is used in Open Source to make that
>> a non-issue. (just saying ... I think people understand where I'm
>> getting at :)
>
> You removed the start of my comment:

I trying to support your question, not argument against it... I have
not seen in any definition of Open Standard that the 'standard
definition organization' is required to commit themselves and support
it for X years.

>  Wanted to also point out that "open group" here isn't that well defined.
>
> That is, if "open specification" requires an "open group" then what defines 
> an open group, and does that group have to exist in perpetuity?

Indeed. This is rather unclear to me too, as I tried to further get
into in my last reply to Peter.

I don't know what a 'community process' is...

Egon


-- 
Post-doc @ Uppsala University
Proteochemometrics / Bioclipse Group of Prof. Jarl Wikberg
Homepage: http://egonw.github.com/
Blog: http://chem-bla-ics.blogspot.com/
PubList: http://www.citeulike.org/user/egonw/tag/papers

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download Intel&#174; Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
_______________________________________________
Blueobelisk-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/blueobelisk-discuss

Reply via email to