Re: the rhetoric of "standard" Re: why standard scheme matters to me

[Thomas Bushnell, BSG]

Tom Lord <address@hidden> writes:

> Calling R5RS "standard (official) Scheme" propagates a harmful rumor.

It sounds like you still don't understand my point.  When I called
R5RS a standard, I did so in the sense that the Guile page calls it a
standard and everyone else I know does.

It is the R5RS people and their successors who are specifying a
language that, at present, I have considerable interest in.  I don't
care for the claim that deeply nefarious and nasty things are going
on, or the conspiracy theory, or any of the rest.

That lineage of documents (which I refer to as "standards" as does
just about everyone else I know) define a language that I have great
interest in.  I am interested in guile in large part in so far as it
is an implementation of that language, rather than some other.

Is that clear?

Thomas