Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!kddlab!trl!rdmei!ptimtc!olivea!apple!usc!sdd.hp.com!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!gatech!psuvax1!psuvm!cunyvm!byuvm!byuvax!taylorj
From: taylorj@yvax.byu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.ivideodisc
Subject: Re: Call for discussion: comp.multimedia
Message-ID: <1851taylorj@yvax.byu.edu>
Date: 30 Nov 90 06:32:45 GMT
Lines: 35

I agree completely that there needs to be a group (or groups) addressing
multimedia, and that the current group (comp.ivideodisc) is inappropriately
named.

I also agree with posters who feel that comp.video would be confused with
rec.video.  Never underestimate the stupidity of net users.

I also agree (I'm a very agreeable person :-) that in spite of the problem
with the name, a "comp.video" group would be useful for those using
computers for video production or desktop video but not for interactive
multimedia.

Therefore, I suggest a naming scheme something like the following:

A base name of "comp.media" with group names such as
   comp.media.video or comp.media.
   comp.media.multimedia or comp.media.interactive

A big advantage of this naming scheme is that as groups get too crowded or
as new areas develop it would be easy to add new groups such as
comp.media.audio, comp.media.dvi, comp.media.video-compression, etc.

If this isn't acceptable, I'd at least like to make an objection to the term
"multimedia."  I would prefer "interactive multimedia" or even the broader
"interactive media."  If the name comp.interactive-media is too long, I
suppose it could be shortened to comp.imedia.


By the way, is this discussion supposed to take place in comp.ivideodisc or
news.announce.newgroups?  (I'd crosspost if my newsreader let me.)


Jim Taylor
Microcomputer Support for Curriculum  |
Brigham Young University              |  Bitnet: taylorj@byuvax.bitnet
101 HRCB, Provo, UT  84602            |  Internet: taylorj@yvax.byu.edu


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com