I have nothing against a GUI or other functionality being added to the standard, however I've seen multiple people suggest since the CLI was released that the CLI wasn't truly cross-platform or that it wasn't a real or full standard
simply because MS didn't include technologies they built atop the standard. My argument is that this should not be expected because it has not usually been done before. Treating the CLI differently is to use a double-standard. But for Java and Tkl (neither
ISO standards to my knowledge), language standards don't generally include GUI libraries. It may expand the requirements for a conforming implementation, libraries are usually an area of vendor competition, and in the case of the MS components usually discussed,
are platform components (WinFX) or other solutions that drive platform adoption (ASP.NET). I include ASP.NET because portions of the *x crowd normally mention it along with pretty much everything else. A standard's great, but there also needs to be room for
the vendor to go beyond it and differentiate.
1. We're in agreement about it being a standard, from a technical stand point. You (and others) miscontrued what I meant (because I worded it very poorly) in this regard.
2. The reality is that people don't believe it's a standard in anything but name, for lots of political reasons, including the perception that Microsoft is "holding back" what they believe to be crucial parts of the .NET platform.
3. No, Java is not standardized. That was another point I made. Microsoft did the right thing here, I just want to see them go "the full way" with the effort. And again, this isn't a technical issue, it's a political/marketing issue.
4. I agree with giving the vendor room to compete, but a language can't ignore a standard library either. Currently the standard includes a BCL that encompasses most of the functionality included by more traditional languages. But, politically, like it or
not, the bar has been raised with regards to what people expect from a language's "standard" library these days.
Now, from a personal stand point, I don't agree with the political aspects of dismissing C# as a standard. In this regard, I agree with the Mono folks. The current standard provides a very nice, cross platform, language. There's lots you can do with it,
and it has advantages over other choices. However, I still believe, and not only to placate those playing politics here, that many of the APIs available from Microsoft should be standardized, including WPF, WF, WCF, et. al. I see doing so as a win for everyone.