Xref: utzoo comp.windows.x:8105 news.groups:7477 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!bu-cs!encore!bzs From: bzs@Encore.COM (Barry Shein) Newsgroups: comp.windows.x,news.groups Subject: Re: comp.andrew vote report Message-ID: <4937@xenna.Encore.COM> Date: 19 Feb 89 15:04:58 GMT References: <7724@paris.ics.uci.edu> Followup-To: news.groups Organization: Encore Computer Corp, Marlboro, MA Lines: 24 In-reply-to: nagel@beaver.ics.uci.edu's message of 18 Feb 89 01:21:40 GMT Posting-Front-End: GNU Emacs 18.41.15 of Tue Jun 9 1987 on xenna (berkeley-unix) Although the solution is not obvious the problem, as I see it, is that the news hierarchy seems to be unfit to handle software packages very well. There are a few specific sub-topics under comp (editors, compilers, databases) but where would one put any of the following: NFS/RFS/Vice, spreadsheets, desk top publishing (eg. frame or interleaf), LOCUS, CAD/CAM (autodesk, cadds) etc. Perhaps the time has come to start a comp.software tree, move compilers, graphics, editors, database under that and let that tree encompass these topics? Like I said, it's not easy or obvious. One major problem is that many of those topics have their abstract component (eg. discussing graphics algorithms) versus specific realizations (eg. packages available.) Definite taxonomical challenge, but I think it's long overdue and for one would be happy if no one rushed in with a solution but, rather, spent a few months kicking around solutions (perhaps an electronic committee? uh oh.) -Barry Shein, ||Encore||