From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: Sat Aug 08 1998 - 14:55:27 CDT
In <1ddeghx.sa31crm1h13aM@roxboro0-033.dyn.interpath.net> phenix@interpath.com (John Moreno) writes:
>Maurizio Codogno <mau@beatles.cselt.it> wrote:
>> John Moreno writes in <1ddavct.ze7f9svvczdxM@roxboro0-030.dyn.interpath.net>:
>>
>> > > > However, it doesn't currently support having more than one article with
>> > > > a given name.
>> > >
>> > > Add it!
>> >
>> > Agreed - but again I say that the reason this hasn't previously been
>> > adopted is because it was never given a nntp syntax and adopted by the
>-snip-
>
>> yup, that's true - I was only thinking at the local level.
>>
>> > Something like:
>> >
>> > XNOVER ggg pat|menu
>>
>> seems fine. Of course, we have still to add the Named: header so that
>> the server can place it.
>>
>> Is it better that the form of Named: is
>>
>> Named: foo.bar.baz/faq
>>
>> so that even in case of crossposted groups the named article goes to
>> just one place? I cannot reach Brad's site at the moment, so I cannot
>> check his proposed syntax.
>I would suggest that we reject cross-posted named articles. We might
>want to come up with a syntax for a named hierarchy article - but a
>particular article should really be one or the other, either group or
>hierarchy and it's listed in all sub-groups.
AFAIR recall, the checkpolicies document could apply to whole hierarchies.
Does that mean we need Named articles at the hierarchy and sub-hierarchy
level? And would that mean the article was autopmatically crossposted to
every group below it in the (sub)hierarchy.
I think I hope not.
OTOH, I see nothing wrong with cross-posting. I would think that a Named
article should have the named property in every group it was cross posted
to. So if you want to cross post it somewhere else without having the
named property, then you would have to post a 2nd copy. It sounds too
complicated to have articles which are "named" in some groups but not in
others.
>I think that "six months" is too short - at least a year and preferably
>two, and possibly even indefinitely (i.e. it sticks around until it's
>canceled or superseded/replaced).
No. That is just about the longest I would consider acceptable.
-- Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------ Email: chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Voice/Fax: +44 161 437 4506 Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5