Xref: utzoo comp.cog-eng:647 comp.software-eng:834
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!decwrl!labrea!rutgers!apple!voder!pyramid!prls!philabs!gcm!dc
From: dc@gcm (Dave Caswell)
Newsgroups: comp.cog-eng,comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Re: Re: OPEN LOOK
Message-ID: <607@white.gcm>
Date: 25 Sep 88 00:38:31 GMT
References: <762@esl.UUCP> <4786@whuts.UUCP>
Reply-To: dc@white.UUCP (Dave Caswell)
Organization: Greenwich Capital Markets, Greenwich, CT
Lines: 15

In article <4786@whuts.UUCP> spf@whuts.UUCP (Steve Frysinger of Blue Feather Farm) writes:
.not even sure about this).  But no standard should make arbitrary
.choices.  And (so far in my reading of it) the OPEN LOOK seems to
.include such arbitrary choices.  The last time we got a "standard"
.(this time an operating system) we lost file version numbers for ever.

There isn't anything wrong with "arbitrary choices".   How would you
like it if every videocasette you bought was a different size? Or if every 
traiffic light used a different color for "go"?  Certain things are better
standardized for consistancies sake regardless of the number of equal
alternatives available.

-- 
Dave Caswell
Greenwich Capital Markets                             uunet!philabs!gcm!dc