Newsgroups: news.software.b
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: LET'S NAME THE GUILTY POSTING SOFTWARE!!!
Message-ID: <1991Jun24.194916.15487@zoo.toronto.edu>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1991 19:49:16 GMT
References: <1991Jun19.154645.11885@zoo.toronto.edu> <1991Jun19.172544.32267@mp.cs.niu.edu> <1991Jun19.182811.19812@zoo.toronto.edu> <1991Jun19.192501.23864@mp.cs.niu.edu>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <1991Jun19.192501.23864@mp.cs.niu.edu> rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) writes:
>>>...the actual date checking is done by relaynews at the next news
>>>site down the line...
>>
>>Unfortunately, there is absolutely and positively no way inews can check
>>this, and it's not just a problem at the next site down the line...
>
>  Why don't you discuss the issue, and not something else?

I was discussing this issue, albeit perhaps in a slightly subtle way.

>  If my site holds a month of history, and the next site only holds two
>weeks, that is just too bad.  I agree with that.
>
>  If my site holds one month of history, and a user here posts an article
>with a 1980 date on it, the local inews does not complain, the local
>relaynews does not complain.  It is dropped down the line.  The fact that
>it is dropped down the line is just too bad.  But the fact that inews DID
>NOT COMPLAIN is just a design error...

What should it complain about?  The fact that the date is outside the legal
range on *your* site?  What does that signify?  It certainly doesn't signify
that the article is going to get dropped further down the line.  Nor does
the absence of such an out-of-range condition signify that the article won't
be dropped at the very next site.  What, exactly, should be the criterion
for complaint?  What, exactly, are you promising the user if that complaint
does not appear?

> Don't tell me that "Unfortunately, there is absolutely and positively no
>way inews can check this", because that is absolutely and positively not
>a believable position.

I assumed you wanted it to check whether the date would permit downstream
propagation.  There is absolutely and positively no way it can do that. 
Really.  The information just isn't available.

As I think I mentioned, checking for a utterly nonsensical date is not out of
the question, although even there it gets tricky to decide what qualifies.
But that's a different problem from making a check that will let you promise
the user something.
-- 
"We're thinking about upgrading from    | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
SunOS 4.1.1 to SunOS 3.5."              |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry