Xref: utzoo comp.sys.ibm.pc:20720 comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d:1254 Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!rutgers!mailrus!cornell!batcomputer!sun.soe.clarkson.edu!nelson From: nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d Subject: Re: DESCRIBE.TXT Message-ID: Date: 31 Oct 88 00:54:27 GMT References: <1565@sun.soe.clarkson.edu> <592@tank.uchicago.edu> Sender: nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu Reply-To: nelson@clutx.clarkson.edu Organization: Clarkson University Lines: 23 In-reply-to: ads4@tank.uchicago.edu's message of 30 Oct 88 22:55:24 GMT In article <592@tank.uchicago.edu> ads4@tank.uchicago.edu (adam david sah) writes: Don't include the filename DESCRIBE.TXT as a standard filename ... a collision of names and one of them will have to go. ... Why not set the standard to be the filename (which is much less likely to collide) and the extension to be kept constant. Example: FILENAME.DES or .DSC (both short for description...) -A.Sah'88 SysOp, The Art of Science BBs (312)752-6104 Well, since the whole idea is to make life easier for SysOps, and here's one SysOp who think that DESCRIBE.TXT will make it harder, I'm willing to change my mind. Are there any other sysops who think would prefer archive-name.DSC to DESCRIBE.TXT ? -- --russ (nelson@clutx [.bitnet | .clarkson.edu]) To surrender is to remain in the hands of barbarians for the rest of my life. To fight is to leave my bones exposed in the desert waste.