On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 11:28:17PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
>I think the first thing to realize that is is rather much outside the 
>scope of NetBSD.

I see that. but I don't entirely agree. How can programmers or
users be expected to conform to or utilize a standard when it is
difficult or impossible to know where to look or to even know if a
standard exists?

After using netbsd for nearly two years, one thing I appreciate
over Linux (where I have most of my experience) is adherence to
best practice (and presumably standards). In Linux it seems like
somebody reinvented the wheel around every corner.

If a guideline where available as to which standards are
acceptable for netbsd, where and when they are used, where they
came from, and what they are authoritative for; where they are
published and where reasonable or possible, even included; that
would go a long ways to getting everyone on the same page--I'm
not suggesting a finite set of standards should be used or people
should be discouraged from making up their own, rather the
established standards could be more visible.

>Second, the ANSI standard isn't the only way of doing things.

I understand that, what I'm describing is a means by which
developers and users can use to make an educated decision on
which standard is appropriate (vs not knowing if a standard was
available at all).

>The 
>termcap is a fairly good source of information, even if it isn't complete.
>But the termcap file is huge! But I would say that is a good place to 
>start if you want information, unless you want to read standards that 
>might or might not be relevant for you.

I'm thinking more about regulated deployment than my immediate
needs.  A STANDARDS section of man pages to describe which
standard(s) the author used (and where to find them); along with a
standards(5) page to summarize the most common choices available.

>Terminals exist outside of NetBSD. It's like if we would start 
>documenting how RS-232 works in NetBSD, just because we happen to have 
>serial ports.

I appreciate netbsd is not authoritative for most of the standards
it is built on, but if a path for discovery was begun, well it
would be a lot easier to make serial devices or drivers.

Your description of POSIX, ANSI, ISO relationships was
informative, Johnny.  Disclosure of relevant standards, who is
authoritative over them and their hierarchy would be a valuable
addition to netbsd, in my personal opinion. :)

// George


-- 
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator <IXOYE><