Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!umich!samsung!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!psuvax1!psuvm!BITNIC!ROBINSON From: ROBINSON@BITNIC.BITNET (Andrew T. Robinson) Newsgroups: bit.listserv.policy-l Subject: Technical direction vs. Services Message-ID: Date: 9 Feb 90 14:41:36 GMT Sender: Discussion about BITNET policies Reply-To: Discussion about BITNET policies Lines: 26 Approved: NETNEWS@PSUVM Gateway In-Reply-To: Your subject -- Re: Specs vs. Standards Richard, I'm not trying to argue that there should be no technical direction to the network. If that's how it came across than I misspoke and I apologize. My concern is more with the way services are developed on this network. A lot of people DO accomplish a lot on BITNET, but a lot more find BITNET too cumbersome for words. I have been using this network since 1982 and I'm frequently not sure how to answer a question like "Where do I go to find information about such-and-such." This is assuredly ignorance on my part, but I maintain that even ignorant people should be able to locate information quickly and easily--WITHOUT having to go to the "nearest LISTSERV", do an INDEX command, and try to guess what files/lists are applicable to the problem. Software like VM NETNEWS is a step in the right direction, and I think that most users would choose NETNEWS over raw LISTSERV (that is based on my experience and may not be applicable in general). However, like LISTSERV and NETSERV, NETNEWS does not seem to encourage imitators. There is no specifications document that would allow enterprising programmers on other systems to develop compatible programs. BITNET is a software oligopoly (at best). I think we need to open the "market" up by specifying the services we want to provide and allowing people to develop their own implementations.