From: John Moreno (phenix@interpath.com)
Date: Mon Aug 10 1998 - 14:03:46 CDT
Charles Lindsey <chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk> wrote:
> phenix@interpath.com (John Moreno) writes:
>
> >I was worried about it being appropriate (charter hasn't changed, faq is
> >still applicable [new ones have just been added]), and expired without
> >someone prepared to repost.
>
> I think the first requirement of any named article scheme is that each
> such article has a "sponsor" who is responsible for it. That includes an
> obligation to repost it (Supersedes: or, more usually, Replaces:) at the
> appropriate intervals. If the sponsor dies, or disappears, or otherwise
> screws up, then the article MUST disappear (after the proper interval,
> that is) because it is then evidently sponsorless.
>
> >What do you think about the article being posted with "EXPIRED: "
> >prefixed to the subject? One problem is that the Date and Control
> >headers would have to be rewritten/removed.
>
> --Ughhh!
Well, I don't really disagree - but think that for a lot of groups (and
especially in the future) that this interval will/may be extended so
that 5 or 10 years can pass between the faq/charter/policy being posted
and becoming outdated. Relying upon a sponsor to keep track of it for
that long is unreasonable (I'd forget after a couple of months - after
all they aren't the ones that need to check for named articles except to
make sure it hasn't been done before).
-- John Moreno