[Accessibility] Re: Q
nick at usenix.org
Thu Aug 4 14:02:55 PDT 2005
On Thu, 2005-08-04 at 13:46, Olaf Schmidt wrote:
> Hi Peter!
> I very much agree with your statement that we should regard both Gtk and Qt as
> standard tookits. Unfortunately the LSB's Selection Criteria do not allow for
> this interpretation, because they say that the library must represent *the*
> (not *a*) "best practice" in the development community for the problem it
> solves. Standardising Gtk would therefore imply that the LSB considers Qt to
> be technically less mature, and of course I object to this:
There is certainly no intention that there must be only one best
practice ... and Qt certainly is not blocked on "best practice". It is
*only* blocked on license.
You should read http://www.linuxbase.org/futures/ideas/issues/libqt/ for
a more detailed discussion of the one and only issue LSB has with Qt,
the license criteria.
> I do not object to change LSB's criteria to adopt several toolkits as *a*
> standard. I only object to changing the criteria in favour of one of the two
> toolkits alone.
No change is required. The criteria absolutely allow multiple competing
libraries. It is not the LSB's job to mediate or to judge a winner in
such competition. Qt is blocked on license alone.
Nick Stoughton USENIX/FSG Standards Liaison
nick at usenix.org (510) 388 1413
More information about the Accessibility