ghenis.pasa@XEROX.COM.UUCP (03/31/87)
Regarding the issue of whether source code, bibliographies, etc should be included in AIList... I realize this would create more work for Moderator Ken Laws, but what if these special postings always went out grouped in SEPARATE ISSUES and the "Subject:" line were made MORE DESCRIPTIVE so readers could skip selectively? Thus instead of getting AIList Digest V5 #92 we could get messages titled: AIList V5 #92 - Source AIList V5 #92 - Bibliography AIList V5 #92 - General or something along those lines (you get the idea) I would like to see source postings back in AIList, maybe the above system can satisfy those who would rather skip them. Any comments? Pablo Ghenis Xerox Artificial Intelligence Systems Educational Services [I could add such a heading, but one result would be longer delays for some material until enough arrived for a full digest. Anyway, I'm not sure I see the savings. My mailer, which is probably the used throughout the Arpanet, doesn't display enough of the title for the keywords to be visible. If I read enough of the message to get the full title, I only have to scroll a few more lines to get the Topics listing. A better solution is to have independent mailing lists for different types of material. Even the Stanford bboard is partitioned now, so why not AIList? The only difficulty is that I don't want to maintain multiple mailing lists. It wouldn't be so bad if I had a good database system for converting request messages into additions and deletions, but I have to do it by hand and I'm not eager to double or triple the time this takes. I've heard of a database server for code distributions that might be open to the Arpanet; I will investigate. I am beginning to think, though, that FTP and mail requests are not such a bad thing. Gordon Novak tells me he has had over thirty requests for his code, in addition to any FTPs (which he wouldn't know about). Handling thirty requests is a bit of a hassle, but also a bit of a thrill. It generates professional contacts and keeps people in touch. Why, I can imagine someone disallowing FTP altogether just to keep track of who is getting the code. To go even further, a separate interest list could be established. And if a code author didn't want the hassle at all, s/he could use AIList to find someone else willing to handle the distribution in return for access to the code. Isn't this better than having an impersonal central server stuffed with obsolete, unmaintained code? Or a broadcast system like AIList? The only real disadvantage is that code may become inaccesible if the author leaves his current site, but copies should be available from somewhere (perhaps via AIList query). -- KIL]