Subj : Re: linked
To : Jasen Betts
From : Bob Short
Date : Fri Dec 13 2002 11:10 am
On 12 Dec 02 21:19:09, Jasen Betts said the following to Bob Short:
JB> BS> It was suggested to me that this echo would be a great place to
JB> BS> start discussing possible nodelist format changes, and the
JB> BS> software which would utilize them.
JB> we were kicking that ball around a bit a few months back,
JB> we came up with a few different proposals for a new (IE non-slf)
JB> nodelist formats and little else
So far, I have seen only two potential solutions (in FTSC_PUBLIC) to
the problems of SLF limitations. One involves XML, an external prog.
language which will require too many steps to utilize. The other an
expansion (through re-arrangement or addition) of the SLF, requiring
modificatons to IP software, and (probably) a new IP seg editor(s).
JB> uunfortunately FTSC doesn't make the rules, the ZCC does AFAICT.
In a way they do, by standardizing established practices. The panel's
mission in this respect should change, with the placement of people who
have the ability to look at proposals from the programmer's POV.
JB> BS> A lot has been debated regarding flags and fields in the current
JB> BS> NL format, but recent tests have (so far) shown promise for an
JB> BS> extended NL format that make use of ;E(rror) lines, which could be
JB> BS> used by modifying currently developing mailers, and a seg editor
JB> BS> to compile it.
JB> it'll require programmers to think a bit more when reading the nodelist and
JB> code their software to look-ahead a bit, but that shouldn't be a problem
JB> for experienced programmers.
