Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!bfmny0!tneff
From: tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff)
Newsgroups: news.software.b
Subject: Re: Just how useful is crossposting?
Message-ID: <14934@bfmny0.UU.NET>
Date: 20 Nov 89 15:56:20 GMT
References: <47326@looking.on.ca> <1989Nov14.195710.11774@NCoast.ORG> <48887@looking.on.ca> <1989Nov17.231128.20369@rpi.edu> <1989Nov18.165018.11206@ddsw1.MCS.COM> <14930@bfmny0.UU.NET> <50036@looking.on.ca>
Reply-To: tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff)
Lines: 16
Summary:
Expires:
Sender:
Followup-To:

One thing to keep in mind when designing for reference trees is that
ORDER of news delivery is not guaranteed, i.e., the followup may arrive
before the parent.  That's one reason that the only-the-latest reference
approach is risky.  At minimum you have to keep an open-minded "cache"
for apparently broken trees; or be prepared at any moment to discover
that what looks like the "root" is in fact just a branch.  With the
up-to-N parents approach you implicitly have a few "hooks" on which
to hang early or late articles.

In the real world there should also be a way of coping with all those
NON-superhuman news posting agents which don't make nice with the Refs
line.  It's not fair to ostracize them from of a discussion except for
in-house groups where uniform newsware is a reasonable stipulation.
-- 
"We plan absentee ownership.  I'll stick to       `o'   Tom Neff
 building ships." -- George Steinbrenner, 1973    o"o   tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET