From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: Mon Aug 10 1998 - 10:25:58 CDT
In <Pine.SUN.3.96.980808224811.23117B-100000@kira> John Stanley <stanley@PEAK.ORG> writes:
>If the names are not unique, then it is feasible for there to be more than
>one article with the same name. If you propose that the name refer only to
>the most recent article using that name, you open the door to FAQ wars,
>where opposing FAQs will be posted as often as possible just to grab the
>"most recent" title.
>No, the name must refer to all articles with that name, else you create a
>defacto-uniqueness that is not justified.
I think you and Buddha are getting all steamed up about a non problem.
"Names" are not interesting. If they get duplicated, I don't care (I might
be confused). We don't worry about two articles with the same Subject:
header, do we?
The simplest system is just this. Some articles have the property "Named:"
(i.e. they contain a Named: header). They are posted, canceled,
superseded, replaced, cross-posted and expired just like any other
articles. There are just two special properties:
1. Servers automatically maintain an index, for each group, of the named
articles it contains. Maybe an NNTP command to deliver the index, or parts
of it. Reading agents contain a command 'show-named-articles' to display
the index, and let you click on the ones you want to see. And maybe show
you the index first time you subscribe to the group and ... whatever other
goodies you want. If two articles with identical names appear in response
to that command, you just say "Hey! someone screwed up" and you'd be
right.
2. To post such an article, you have to have the "right" to do so. The
"right" involved is similar to the "rights" that moderators have to be the
sole posters to moderated groups, and will be granted and administered in
the same way. So a Named article will include an Approved: header from
some person/entity claiming to have the appropriate right. This SHOULD be
backed up by an appropriate digital signature, when we have such things
(the same applies to conventional moderation too, of course; whatever the
mechanism, it should apply to both).
Actually, in practice the right will be granted by some rule in the
Charter, or by the administrators of the hierarchy, or by the previous
holder passing on the right to his successor, or whatever else we may
decide. And if it is cross-posted, you need to have the "right" in each of
the groups concerned. If we follow Brad's more elaborate schemes, there
will be means for delegating such rights (hopeullly valid only within some
set time-period). In free.*, everyone will have every right. Probably in
alt.* too (unless the people in alt.config can construct a consensus to
the contrary).
My only concern is that, within a given group, different rights might
apply to different Types of article. For example, it might be that anyone
could post a FAQ, but only the hierarchy administrator could post a
"Charter". So there have to be keywords, such as "Charter", which are
included as parameters of the Named: header, and which are mentioned in
all certificates that purport to grant or delegate such a right. But you
don't need to invent the keywords to be used ab initio. They just get
invented as/when the partoicular need arises.
-- 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