On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 18:55 -0800, Eugene T.S. Wong wrote: > On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 18:07:56 -0800, Jasper Bryant-Greene > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > How can it be called a standard when only one person uses it? > > I've never thought of a standard as something that required anybody to use > it. If we all stopped using ASCII, then it would still be a standard. If I > understand correctly, then I abide by #6 at > http://opera.answers.com/standard > I take it that you disagree? > > I think the opposite of a standard is no standard. That means if I abide > by no standard, then there will be inconsistencies. > > I hope that I clarified. If anybody wants more details, then just say so. >
Yes, I do disagree. There is no consistency (or otherwise) when there is only one person using a particular way of doing things, as there is no-one else to be consistent with. Therefore, I don't believe a method that is only used by one person can be called a standard. This is a bit of a tangent from the original discussion though :) -- Jasper Bryant-Greene General Manager Album Limited 021 708 334 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.album.co.nz GPG Key ID: CCF9E4CC
