lear@genbank.BIO.NET (Eliot) (08/16/90)
The following modifications will be effected in tonight's update to bionet.molbio.genbank.updates: [1] Updates will no longer be batched into one message. One message will contain one sequence. [2] The subject line will contain the ACCESSION number of the entry. Please alert me to any bugs you might notice. 'best, -- Eliot Lear [lear@turbo.bio.net]
lfk@athena.mit.edu (Lee F Kolakowski) (08/16/90)
It may not break anything, but it does not really add much either. A better approach might be a shorter bit of the DEFINITION as a Subject Line. This would allow persons maintaining small specific databases and easier scan. -- Frank Kolakowski ====================================================================== |lfk@athena.mit.edu || Lee F. Kolakowski | |lfk@eastman2.mit.edu || M.I.T. | |kolakowski@wccf.mit.edu || Dept of Chemistry | |lfk@mbio.med.upenn.edu || Room 18-506 | |lfk@hx.lcs.mit.edu || 77 Massachusetts Ave.| |AT&T: 1-617-253-1866 || Cambridge, MA 02139 | |--------------------------------------------------------------------| | #include <woes.h> | | One-Liner Here! | ======================================================================
kristoff@genbank.BIO.NET (David Kristofferson) (08/16/90)
Frank and Roy, One of the purposes in breaking the messages up was to help avoid possible truncation problems (although this is not a permanent solution). The suggestion of putting the DEFINITION line on the Subject is a good one which I will discuss with the staff. The "Keywords" feature in USENET news might also be of some use in this regards. -- Sincerely, Dave Kristofferson GenBank On-line Service Manager kristoff@genbank.bio.net
roy@phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) (08/17/90)
In lear@genbank.BIO.NET (Eliot) writes: > Updates will no longer be batched into one message. One > message will contain one sequence. I don't see how this could break anything, but I suspect it might make things significantly less efficient (i.e. if a process gets forked for each message, it makes for a lot more forking). -- Roy Smith, Public Health Research Institute 455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016 roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu -OR- {att,cmcl2,rutgers,hombre}!phri!roy "Arcane? Did you say arcane? It wouldn't be Unix if it wasn't arcane!"
roy@phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) (08/17/90)
kristoff@genbank.BIO.NET (David Kristofferson) writes: > The suggestion of putting the DEFINITION line on the Subject is a good > one which I will discuss with the staff. The "Keywords" feature in > USENET news might also be of some use in this regards. It's been a while since I've perused the appropriate RFCs, but my recollection is that it is legal to make up headers of your own, starting with an "X". It might be a good idea, for example, to have a news article header called "X-Definition:" which is just the DEFINITION line from the GenBank locus. -- Roy Smith, Public Health Research Institute 455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016 roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu -OR- {att,cmcl2,rutgers,hombre}!phri!roy "Arcane? Did you say arcane? It wouldn't be Unix if it wasn't arcane!"