Subj : Number of BBSes?
To : Rick Van Ruth
From : Frank Vest
Date : Sun Jan 05 2003 02:24 pm
On (06 Jan 03) Rick Van Ruth wrote to Frank Vest...
Hello Rick,
FV> Basically, there would be no need for the IBN, IFT and so forth flags
FV> since the "finger server" would provide that information and use it to
FV> trigger the needed software.
FV> Is that future development? :-)
FV> I don't mind it being discussed here if that is better than
FV> FTSC_PUBLIC.
RV> I would just think its more the scope for people who develop, so I
RV> figure more of those would hang out in development echos. I guess
RV> people will discuss stuff where ever these days :-)
Yup. It seems that where ever a topic is brought up, that is where it
gets discussed.
Thing is, the subject of a new Nodelist format was brought up in the
FTSC_PUBLIC echo. As discussions went along, I thought about all the
"problems" with the SLF Nodelist that were brought up. None made total
sense to me. EG:
Q. How can the format of a comma delimited file have a problem?
A. It can't. The programs that use the file have the problems.
Note: The SLF can have as many fields as desired. It's the programs
that use the file that limit it. That limit is imposed by the
legacy software that is abandoned and can't be fixed.
Q. Can a new format fix the problems?
A. Yes and No.
Yes: Some limits might be relieved.
Note: These limits are in the current programs, not the format of
the list. Each list is simply a file. The programs are the
key to making any of them workable.
No: There will be the need of distributing two Nodelists files.
Note: This will be a place for failure in distribution.
No: The limits are in the programs using the list. Provisions will
still need to be made for legacy software.
At any rate, That's just my conviction and belief. :)
Frank
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/flv
http://biseonline.com/r19
--- PPoint 3.01
* Origin: Holy Cow! I'm A Point!! (1:124/6308.1)
