Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!texbell!sugar!ficc!peter
From: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: hum.* vs rec.arts.* and rec.music.*
Message-ID: <92S14F1xds13@ficc.uu.net>
Date: 15 Feb 90 13:06:48 GMT
References: <1990Feb14.230808.4556@cs.rochester.edu>
Reply-To: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Lines: 12

In article <1990Feb14.230808.4556@cs.rochester.edu> yamauchi@cs.rochester.edu (Brian Yamauchi) writes:
> If hum.* is created, does the entire rec.arts.* subhierarchy get
> shifted over into hum.arts.* or does it stay under rec.*?  How about
> rec.music.*?  Does this turn into hum.music.*?

If the intent is to create a hierarcy that includes at least part of
rec.arts.*, then I submit that the name "arts.*" is no less appropriate
than "humanities.*", not to mention being shorter, and certainly better
than such nauseating abbreviations as "hum.*".

I think a "hum.*" hierarchy should not absorb anything from rec.arts.*,
but an "arts.*" hierarchy should.
-- 
 _--_|\  Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. <peter@ficc.uu.net>.
/      \
\_.--._/ Xenix Support -- it's not just a job, it's an adventure!
      v  "Have you hugged your wolf today?" `-_-'