Hi! > Steering things back to the original topic, my objections to collaboration > with FIG seem to be pretty much centered around their edictal approach to > userland style guidelines and how our involvement could be construed as an > endorsement of said style. If they would agree to make some modifications > to this approach, I'd probably be able to withdraw my objection entirely.
Any standards group would have "edictal" approach. That's the point of standard - it prescribes a way of doing something. You may follow it or not, but if it doesn't do that it's not a standard. Now, I do not know if such standards will be successful in PHP world. But I think it's a good idea to try and see if people adopt it. Probably some things should have some standards - even if just to describe some common things - it's much easier to say "we follow standard X" than to have 10-page description of the coding style and trying to figure out if it's the same as another 10-page description or not. As for having php.net representative, I'm not sure if it is needed since I'm not sure what is the purpose of it. If it's just "having a vote", I don't think it makes a lot of sense - php.net is not a PHP framework and does not represent any frameworks, and is to serve any of them and all of them and all non-framework developers equally. If it's to provide some expertise or answers to core/internals question, this can be done by anybody on the list without designating any special person. If it would serve some other purpose, I think additional explanation is needed. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
