Re: a system that fails spectacularly

2005-12-09 Thread M. Warner Losh
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Clive D.W. Feather" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: : M. Warner Losh said: : > >> * A second is represented by an integer from 0 to 61; : [...] : > >> but this specification : > >> follows the date and time conventions for ISO C. : : Of course, I

Re: a system that fails spectacularly

2005-12-09 Thread Daniel R. Tobias
On 9 Dec 2005 at 10:42, David Harper wrote: > On the other hand, the idea of ISO 9000 compliant Morris dancers is a > very funny one. Presumably, they'd have to standardise the size of > their pig's bladders. There's a Monty Python sketch just waiting to be > written. > > I'm guessing that their l

Re: a system that fails spectacularly

2005-12-09 Thread Peter Bunclark
On Fri, 9 Dec 2005, Clive D.W. Feather wrote: > boundary than to deal with stuff coming in. In other words, it's easier to > only buy widgets from ISO 9000 compliant suppliers than to provide an > inbound widget quality test department. >From what I understand from some of the recent emails, you w

Re: a system that fails spectacularly

2005-12-09 Thread David Harper
Clive D.W. Feather wrote: Steve Allen said: This became a long-running joke in the morris dance community. A few years back some English town councils decided to become ISO 9000 compliant. That required them to ascertain that all of their sub-contractors were also compliant. Actually, it d

Re: a system that fails spectacularly

2005-12-09 Thread Clive D.W. Feather
M. Warner Losh said: > >> * A second is represented by an integer from 0 to 61; [...] > >> but this specification > >> follows the date and time conventions for ISO C. Of course, ISO C fixed this misunderstanding many years ago. -- Clive D.W. Feather | Work: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |

Re: a system that fails spectacularly

2005-12-09 Thread Clive D.W. Feather
Steve Allen said: > This became a long-running joke in the morris dance community. A few > years back some English town councils decided to become ISO 9000 > compliant. That required them to ascertain that all of their > sub-contractors were also compliant. Actually, it does nothing of the sort.