Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!sundc!netxcom!ewiles From: ewiles@netxcom.UUCP (Edwin Wiles) Newsgroups: comp.sources.d Subject: Re: A thought about USENET. Message-ID: <240@netxcom.UUCP> Date: Wed, 1-Jul-87 09:32:20 EDT Article-I.D.: netxcom.240 Posted: Wed Jul 1 09:32:20 1987 Date-Received: Thu, 2-Jul-87 04:37:27 EDT References: <2577@psuvax1.UUCP> <1408@oliveb.UUCP> <841@van-bc.UUCP> <1443@ncc.UUCP> <843@van-bc.UUCP> <507@array.UUCP> Reply-To: ewiles@netxcom.UUCP (Edwin Wiles) Lines: 28 Summary: Nice idea, but... In article <507@array.UUCP> rob@array.UUCP (Rob Marchand) writes: >In article <841@van-bc.UUCP>, sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne) writes: >< If this line could contain additional information such as the suggested >< file name to store the posting then the expiration process could do a much >< more intelligent job of saving the information. For example: >< >< Archive: sources/games/warp7.2 ( warp7 part 2 of 7 ) >< Archive: sources/unix/smail2.3.4 ( smail 2.3 part 4 of 5 ) > >[edited]...If the moderator then set out to have the Subject: >line start with, say, a standard format, e.g. > ispell01.shar (shar file (no kidding :-) > ispell01.pat (patch file) The problem with either of these methods is that some systems have file name size limits of 8 characters, some of 14, some of 32, and some have no limits. There would always be some poor person whose archiving gets stomped on because some poster didn't make sure his file names were no more than 8/14/etc... characters long. Leave it up to the moderator to make sure that the file names are of an acceptable length and the delay in posting will really get out of hand. Nice idea, but... Back to the terminal! -- | Edwin Wiles ...!seismo!sundc!netxcom!ewiles | Net Express, Inc. "Who?... Me?... What opinions?!?" | 1953 Gallows Rd. Suite 300 Schedule: (n.) An ever changing nightmare. | Vienna, VA 22180