spaf@gatech.CSNET (Gene Spafford) (01/09/86)
I just happened to go browsing through our spool directory, and
I really find it quite amusing to note that in over three weeks, there
have been only 3 articles posted to net.internat, and two of them were
items crossposted from net.jokes.
It still astonishes me to think about the amount of abuse that I
received way back when because I dared try to "rmgroup" the group
because it hadn't gone through the proper procedure for creation. I
was told in no uncertain terms that there was lots of interest and more
than enough support to make it a viable newsgroup. Right.
Of course, maybe I missed it. Maybe all the people who obviously knew
so much used the group to solve all the international standardization
problems, using just 120 articles (total we have ever received in the
group) to do so. Good job, folks.
--
Gene "the end is in sight" Spafford
The Clouds Project, School of ICS, Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332-0280
CSNet: Spaf @ GATech ARPA: Spaf%GATech.CSNet @ Relay.CS.NET
uucp: ...!{akgua,decvax,hplabs,ihnp4,linus,seismo,ulysses}!gatech!spafminow@decvax.UUCP (Martin Minow) (01/10/86)
Gene Spafford noted that net.internat has been quiet lately, suggesting that the problems have been solved and this news group is consequently unneeded. There is a subtle internationalization point to be made here: many Europeans could get a solid two-week vacation at Christmastime this year by investing five vacation days; thus it is reasonable to expect that traffic will be lower at this time. Martin Minow decvax!minow
iwm@icdoc.UUCP (Ian Moor) (01/11/86)
In article <2390@gatech.CSNET> spaf@gatech.CSNET (Gene Spafford) writes: >I just happened to go browsing through our spool directory, and >I really find it quite amusing to note that in over three weeks, there >have been only 3 articles posted to net.internat, and two of them were >items crossposted from net.jokes. > >It still astonishes me to think about the amount of abuse that I >received way back when because I dared try to "rmgroup" the group >because it hadn't gone through the proper procedure for creation. I > >Of course, maybe I missed it. Maybe all the people who obviously knew >so much used the group to solve all the international standardization >problems, using just 120 articles (total we have ever received in the >group) to do so. Good job, folks. >-- >Gene "the end is in sight" Spafford >The Clouds Project, School of ICS, Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332-0280 >CSNet: Spaf @ GATech ARPA: Spaf%GATech.CSNet @ Relay.CS.NET >uucp: ...!{akgua,decvax,hplabs,ihnp4,linus,seismo,ulysses}!gatech!spaf I never sent any articles because it seemed impropable that any US site would see the group. Please respond on the following topics:- US keyboards why are we forced to use them. The Dinette advert.. Is this a dollar or a pound ? $ Why are machines released over a year ahead in the colonies. (e.g. Amiga) ? Is the Torch XXX better than any American Machine ? Is Gene fit to pedal a C5 ? -- Ian W Moor UUCP: seismo!mcvax!ukc!icdoc!iwm ARPA: iwm%icdoc@ucl Department of Computing Whereat a great and far-off voice was heard, saying, Imperial College. Poop-poop-poopy, and it was even so; and the days 180 Queensgate of Poopy Panda were long in the land. London SW7 Uk.
spaf@gatech.CSNET (Gene Spafford) (01/12/86)
It was suggested in a previous article that net.internat was quiet
because Europeans generally take a two week holiday at the end of the
year. However, I have been informed by someone whose site has the disk
to record such things that net.internat has seen but three articles in
(at least) the last 6 weeks; two of those were jokes. Perhaps the
concept of "week" needs to be standardized?
--
Gene "the end is in sight" Spafford
The Clouds Project, School of ICS, Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332-0280
CSNet: Spaf @ GATech ARPA: Spaf%GATech.CSNet @ Relay.CS.NET
uucp: ...!{akgua,decvax,hplabs,ihnp4,linus,seismo,ulysses}!gatech!spafmikeb@inset.UUCP (Mike Banahan) (01/13/86)
Actually, those of us who are really working on the problem didn't take any holiday at all ove Christmas -- I was reading several proposals on this very subject as the clock struck midnight on Christmas eve. But I'm not looking for sympathy - I get paid for that stuff. What is actually happening is that the ``real'' work, i.e. research and development, to the tune of some millions of dollars/pounds per year (substitute your own conversion factors) is being done by some hard-nosed commercial outfits who seek to make money from it. The work goes in phases - design, test, implement, redesign and so on; it is the classical iterative engineering design and test phase. It is unrealistic to expect that the wider world is going to be invited to participate in the nitty-gritty of this work. What can be done in this newsgroup and the associated committee meetings is to provide 1) a general forum for debate (useful) 2) a way in which the community can help take part in the consultative activity. One of my responsibilities is to try to get information out of the commercial setups about what they are doing and to spread the word. In that way, Joe Public may just get to have some say in what is going on. The poor turkey certainly wouldn't get a look-in otherwise. Interest in (1) has quitened a bit recently. Item (2) has been quiet because the commercial group that I talk to most, X/OPEN, has been going through one of the design proposal stages. They will be holding a private meeting in the last week of January to discuss the work. I am lucky enough to have been invited to the meeting. I hope to get permission to publish some of the proposals which they are making, both here on the net and elsewhere. Comments from the net readership will be very welcome; I suspect (having read the briefing papers) that some controversy may be generated. Wait till you see the proposals for generic Regular Expressions! I expect that the discussion stimulated by the commercial efforts will always be cyclic in nature. -- Mike Banahan, Technical Director, The Instruction Set Ltd. mcvax!ukc!inset!mikeb
flaps@utcs.uucp (Alan J Rosenthal) (01/14/86)
In article <2390@gatech.CSNET> spaf@gatech.CSNET (Gene Spafford) writes: >It still astonishes me to think about the amount of abuse that I >received way back when because I dared try to "rmgroup" the group >because it hadn't gone through the proper procedure for creation. I >was told in no uncertain terms that there was lots of interest and more >than enough support to make it a viable newsgroup. Right. > >Of course, maybe I missed it. Maybe all the people who obviously knew >so much used the group to solve all the international standardization >problems, using just 120 articles (total we have ever received in the >group) to do so. Good job, folks. This article strikes me as unnecessarily flippant. I haven't been receiving net.internat for many months at this point. Therefore I have been unable to contribute to it. Simple, wouldn't you say? I think the discussion in net.internat was quite interesting & was very annoyed at its removal. Alan J Rosenthal {linus|decvax}!utzoo!utcs!flaps, {ihnp4|allegra}!cbosgd!utcs!flaps
bernerus@chalmers.UUCP (Christer Bernerus) (01/14/86)
In article <2390@gatech.CSNET> spaf@gatech.CSNET (Gene Spafford) writes: >Subject: Re: I hate to say I told you so... Did you really mean what you wrote ? >I just happened to go browsing through our spool directory, and >I really find it quite amusing to note that in over three weeks, there >have been only 3 articles posted to net.internat, and two of them were >items crossposted from net.jokes. Hmm, the latest three weeks, let's see, the article was posted on Friday January 10, 1986. This means that the latest 3 weeks is the three weeks beginning with Friday December 20 1985. How many of you out there were on holidays from Dec 20 to Jan 6. At least I was. And I suspect that most of the people in the christian part of the world also were on holidays/vacation. Considering this fact, I dare say that Gene's browsing has only spanned over 3, maybe 4 effective working days. >Of course, maybe I missed it. Maybe all the people who obviously knew >so much used the group to solve all the international standardization >problems, using just 120 articles (total we have ever received in the >group) to do so. Good job, folks. My God! Do you really think that writing articles to USENET SOLVES the problems. I think that the primary reason for having this newsgroup is to have a simple and quick way of communicating between a large number of people in different parts of the world. The actual SOLVING of the problems won't be done on USENET. >Gene "the end is in sight" Spafford "The end of the beginning" maybe... Chris.
franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) (01/14/86)
[Not food] While the idea of international standardization is a very good one, I am afraid it is very naive to expect a newsgroup by itself to accomplish anything. What is needed is an international committee, containing representatives from the principle computer companies in the world. (If UNIX(tm) is to be the basis for such an effort, it may suffice to get those companies which play a major role in UNIX; but this must include a sufficient variety of companies from non-English-speaking countries.) This should be preceded by someone with the requisate technical skills and stature putting together a design proposal, which the committee can use as a starting point. Committees are good at elaborating and correcting designs, but terrible at creating them. A newsgroup would be quite useful as an adjunct to such a committee, providing feedback from a larger group of potential users. Another possible approach would be for some company to go ahead and produce such a system, hoping it will be salable when finished. This is more likely to work for a large, prestigious firm than for a small startup. In this case, the newsgroup would have nothing to do until a preliminary version of the system was available. P.S. I found what there was on net.internat to be quite valuable. But the need now is for someone to do something, not for discussion. Frank Adams ihpn4!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka Multimate International 52 Oakland Ave North E. Hartford, CT 06108
leif@erisun.UUCP (Leif Samuelsson) (01/16/86)
In article <274@ivax.icdoc.UUCP> iwm@icdoc.UUCP (Ian Moor) writes: >Please respond on the following topics:- > US keyboards why are we forced to use them. You're not. European manufacturers usually have better ergonomics and comply better with national standards. > Is this a dollar or a pound ? $ Neither. It's a "currency symbol", like this: $ $ $ $$$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $$$ $ $ $ Followup: Is this a hash sign or a pound? # > Why are machines released over a year ahead in the colonies. (e.g. Amiga) ? > Is the Torch XXX better than any American Machine ? > Is Gene fit to pedal a C5 ? Why are british products never released outside the empire? (e.g. C5) ------ Leif Samuelsson ..enea!erix!erisun!leif Ericsson Information Systems AB, Advanced Workstations Division S-172 93 SUNDBYBERG, Sweden (59 19' N / 17 57' E) ---------------------- ! ! ! | ! ! ! ! This is not a pipe ! ---------------------- (It's not a vertical bar at all!)
iwm@icdoc.UUCP (Ian Moor) (01/22/86)
In article <438@erisun.UUCP> leif@erisun.UUCP (Leif Samuelsson) writes: > >In article <274@ivax.icdoc.UUCP> iwm@icdoc.UUCP (Ian Moor) writes: >>Please respond on the following topics:- > $ $ >Why are british products never released outside the empire? (e.g. C5) > >------ >Leif Samuelsson ..enea!erix!erisun!leif >Ericsson Information Systems AB, Advanced Workstations Division >S-172 93 SUNDBYBERG, Sweden (59 19' N / 17 57' E) > >---------------------- Well the C5 starts to vibrate if you go above 15 mph, the motor cuts out on a heavy load (i.e hill 0 I overtook one on a bike on the level do you really want one Uncle Clive Sinclair will sell you one cheap!) >! ! -- Ian W Moor UUCP: seismo!mcvax!ukc!icdoc!iwm ARPA: iwm%icdoc@ucl Department of Computing Whereat a great and far-off voice was heard, saying, Imperial College. Poop-poop-poopy, and it was even so; and the days 180 Queensgate of Poopy Panda were long in the land. London SW7 Uk.
mikeb@inset.UUCP (Mike Banahan) (01/28/86)
In article <1034@mmintl.UUCP> franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) writes: >While the idea of international standardization is a very good one, I am >afraid it is very naive to expect a newsgroup by itself to accomplish >anything. What is needed is an international committee, containing >representatives from the principle computer companies in the world. (If >UNIX(tm) is to be the basis for such an effort, it may suffice to get >those companies which play a major role in UNIX; but this must include >a sufficient variety of companies from non-English-speaking countries.) That is what the /usr/group, /usr/group/uk and EUUG internationalisation committes are trying to do. >This should be preceded by someone with the requisate technical skills and >stature putting together a design proposal, which the committee can use as >a starting point. Committees are good at elaborating and correcting >designs, but terrible at creating them. Nice idea, but not very easy. Much of this stuff falls into the category of ``unknown territory''; some, I agree, does not. >A newsgroup would be quite useful as an adjunct to such a committee, >providing feedback from a larger group of potential users. That's why it is here >Another possible approach would be for some company to go ahead and produce >such a system, hoping it will be salable when finished. This is more >likely to work for a large, prestigious firm than for a small startup. >In this case, the newsgroup would have nothing to do until a preliminary >version of the system was available. That is what the X/OPEN group is doing at the moment, as are also H.P., Bell Telephone manufacturing and Motorola (to my knowledge). >P.S. I found what there was on net.internat to be quite valuable. But the >need now is for someone to do something, not for discussion. More may be happening than you think. But it is good to hear these points raised; I hope that my points may be informative in response. -- Mike Banahan, Technical Director, The Instruction Set Ltd. mcvax!ukc!inset!mikeb