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