psc@lznv.ATT.COM (Paul S. R. Chisholm) (03/18/88)
< If you lined all the news readers up end-to-end, they'd be easier to shoot. >
I think that moderation of the comp.binaries.ibm.pc group is a good
idea. I'd like to add a suggestion I haven't seen here in a long time.
All text files (READ.MEs, .DOCs, and any source) should *NOT* be ARCed
and uuencoded. They should be bundled together in some other manner
(such as shell archives), and posted in Ascii. There are two reasons:
(1) Obviously enough, if the first part of a program posting is the
READ.ME or the program's documentation, it'll be much easier for a news
reader to decide if the program's worth downloading. It's a real
nuisance to uudecode, download, and ARC/PKXARC ten thousand bytes, just
to discover an neat sounding program doesn't do anything you're
interested in.
(2) Netnews is data compressed when it moves from site to site. I
seem to remember an experiment where someone compared sending an Ascii
file, as compared with ARCing the file (compressing it into binary),
uuencoding it (expanding it into printable Ascii), and then sending it.
Simply sending the original required less transmission between news
nodes.
ARC and the uucode programs offer some checksum capabilities, and we'd
lose those by transmitting straight Ascii. But who cares if a document
loses or gains a byte?
Comments?
-Paul S. R. Chisholm, {ihnp4,cbosgd,allegra,rutgers}!mtune!lznv!psc
AT&T Mail !psrchisholm, Internet psc@lznv.att.com
I'm not speaking for my employer, I'm just speaking my mind.dick@slvblc.UUCP (Dick Flanagan) (03/19/88)
In article <1323@lznv.ATT.COM> psc@lznv.ATT.COM (Paul S. R. Chisholm) writes: > All text files (READ.MEs, .DOCs, and any source) should *NOT* be ARCed > and uuencoded. They should be bundled together in some other manner > (such as shell archives), and posted in Ascii. There are two reasons: Not all Usenet sites are unix sites where shell archives are practical. You ought to try breaking apart a shell archive sometime with a line editor. It gives new meaning to the word "tedious." > (1) Obviously enough, if the first part of a program posting is the > READ.ME or the program's documentation, it'll be much easier for a news > reader to decide if the program's worth downloading. It's a real > nuisance to uudecode, download, and ARC/PKXARC ten thousand bytes, just > to discover an neat sounding program doesn't do anything you're > interested in. A short READ.ME or man page would be fine, but the documentation could also be de-ARCed on the host before deciding to download it. > (2) Netnews is data compressed when it moves from site to site. I > seem to remember an experiment where someone compared sending an Ascii > file, as compared with ARCing the file (compressing it into binary), > uuencoding it (expanding it into printable Ascii), and then sending it. > Simply sending the original required less transmission between news > nodes. I seem to remember counter-experiments where the opposite was shown. (I know; there are lies, damn lies, and statistics.) Besides, not all sites send and received compressed news data. I know this site doesn't and that phone bill comes out of my pocket! > ARC and the uucode programs offer some checksum capabilities, and we'd > lose those by transmitting straight Ascii. But who cares if a document > loses or gains a byte? I do if that document is source code! Dick -- Dick Flanagan, W6OLD GEnie: FLANAGAN UUCP: ...!ucbvax!ucscc!slvblc!dick Voice: +1 408 336 3481 Internet: slvblc!dick@ucscc.UCSC.EDU LORAN: N037 04.7 W122 04.6 USPO: PO Box 155, Ben Lomond, CA 95005