Path: utzoo!censor!dybbuk!yunexus!davecb
From: davecb@yunexus.UUCP (David Collier-Brown)
Newsgroups: news.software.b
Subject: Re: Some possible fixes for the references line
Summary: wrong kind of fix
Keywords: reference
Message-ID: <1937@yunexus.UUCP>
Date: 16 May 89 12:10:47 GMT
References: <3222@looking.UUCP> <3243@looking.UUCP> <283@xdos.UUCP>
Reply-To: davecb@yunexus.UUCP (David Collier-Brown)
Organization: Bimodal: [Interleaf CAnada | York U. Computing Services]
Lines: 24


>In article <3243@looking.UUCP> brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) writes:
| References: line.   The next release of the usenet article format
| will specify that the root message-id always be kept, that it is
| advised that the immediate parent be kept, and that deletions should
| come in the middle of the chain.

In article <283@xdos.UUCP> doug@xdos.UUCP (Doug Merritt) writes:
| For instance, for some reason lately I've been receiving news in many
| groups in reverse order (1 2 3 4 5 is received and presented by rn
| as 5 4 3 2 1). A smart news reader can figure out the right sequence
| from the immediate parents on the References line, whereas if all you
| require to be kept is the root message-id, then you've destroyed all
| sequence info.

  Please select a "fix" which retains as much of the reference
information as possible (there is an extension technique in the RFC,
which most mailers use).  Since people actually see articles **in
different orders**, reconstructing the sequences is difficult without
the order.
  I plan on using this very information for building citation trees, so
I'd appreciate if it isn't lost!

--dave (only four more days to monomania!) c-b