Xref: utzoo comp.sources.d:3170 news.groups:6746
Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!ispi!jbayer
From: jbayer@ispi.UUCP (Jonathan Bayer)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.d,news.groups
Subject: Re: comp.datasets Call For Discussion (was: Re: SAO Part01/49)
Message-ID: <394@ispi.UUCP>
Date: 5 Jan 89 15:43:53 GMT
References: <1249@fig.bbn.com> <1280@vsi1.UUCP> <151@cjsa.WA.COM> <15054@genrad.UUCP> <360@pte.UUCP>
Reply-To: jbayer@ispi.UUCP (Jonathan Bayer)
Organization: Intelligent Software Products, Inc.
Lines: 55

In article <360@pte.UUCP> car@pte.UUCP (Chris Rende) writes:
>In article <15054@genrad.UUCP>, jpn@genrad.com (John P. Nelson) writes:
>> In article <76@sopwith.UUCP> snoopy@sopwith.UUCP (Snoopy) writes:
== =It appears that the number and size of "datasets" posted to the net is
== =growing.  Time to consider a group such as comp.datasets to hold them.
== 
==     Point of order:  What EXACTLY is a "dataset"?  There was a discussion
== recently about starting a group for GIF format graphic pictures:  would
== this group cover these as well as star catalogs?  I mean, these are
== clearly data, and they are large (well, at least in collection).
=
=I think that a group for data postings is a good idea. I'd like to see more
=data be posted: Astronomical data, medical, graphics, geographical maps,
=census, etc...
=
=What is a dataset? I can just see a month's worth of philosophical flaming
=in the wings... :-) Especially if you're talking about LISP stuff... (((:-)))
=It would probably be best to describe the desired contents of the group
=rather than try to define data in a manner which agrees with all netters.
=
=To start the furnace, here are some thoughts that I have about a comp.data
=newsgroup:
=
=- Used to post machine readable information that is NOT program source code.
=  [I say "NOT program source code" because we have source code groups and
=   because LISP code looks like LISP data.]
=- Format can be ASCII or UUENCODED binary.
=- Said data should NOT be binary executables. There are groups for this as well.
=- Although I'm not quite sure of the posting mechanism, I think that some
=  description of the structure of the data should be included with the data.
=  This could be source code segments (like .h files), a column by column
=  description, or just plain text. [comp.data.d?]
=- Said data should be machine independent. I.e., a UUENCODED binary of a
=  MSDOS directory is not generally usefull.
=

This sounds like a good idea.  This way it would be possible for small
sites with little or no interest in most of the datasets would not get
them.  However, I do have a suggestion.  It makes sense to archive these
datasets at several large usenet sites similar to the way that
comp.sources.unix (and others) is currently archived.  There should be a
notice published in a different newsgroup from (suggested) comp.sources.data 
which would let everyone know about the published datasets.  This would
let those sites that need/want it to get it from a major site.

This suggestion does have a problem.  If there are some small sites
which are several nodes downstream of an archive site, and each one
requests a major dataset, then the mail load on the intermediate sites
will go up tremendously.  However, this might be preferable to always
carrying the datasets.
-- 
Jonathan Bayer				"The time has come," the Walrus said...
Intelligent Software Products, Inc.	
19 Virginia Ave.				...uunet!ispi!jbayer
Rockville Centre, NY   11570	(516) 766-2867	jbayer@ispi