Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!usc!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!dino!mehl
From: mehl@cs.iastate.edu (Mark M Mehl)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Splitting hairs in (was RE: Splitting Comp.Sys.Mac again)
Message-ID: <638@dino.cs.iastate.edu>
Date: 16 Feb 90 08:57:46 GMT
References: <38423@apple.Apple.COM> <1990Feb7.235821.7263@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> <38443@apple.Apple.COM> <1990Feb8.201541.24403@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> <1990Feb9.190925.6004@eci386.uucp>
Sender: news@dino.cs.iastate.edu
Reply-To: mehl@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: Dept of EE/CprE -- IOWA STATE UNIV
Lines: 51

jmm@eci386.uucp (John Macdonald) writes:
| I think it would be better to use the name c.s.m.applications or
| c.s.m.programs instead of c.s.m.app to make it clear what the group was
| about for newusers.

I confess that c.s.m.applications is clearer than c.s.m.app; however,
Apple uses the term/program MacApp to mean Mac application to most
people, so I don't think the shorter name is impossible to figure
out.  My only concern for using the unabbreviated name is that the
extensions get too long.  For example,

     comp.sys.mac.applications.text.fonts
     comp.sys.mac.applications.graphics.3d
     comp.sys.mac.applications.database.spreadsheets
     comp.sys.mac.applications.database.hypercard

On the other hand, simply saying . . .

     comp.sys.mac.app.db.hypercard

seems to make it clear enough to most that this group is about
hypercard even with the "app" abbreviation.

| A group for applications would have a clear separation point
| that most people would be able to agree whether a discussion belonged
| there.  It would also be easily further sub-divided in the future,
| either by specific products, or (my preference) by applications areas
| (spreadsheet, wordprocessing, database, communications, graphics,
| publishing, ...)

Absolutely.  Let's not, however, include system-oriented stuff like
networking and communications in an application-oriented group.  This
belongs in c.s.m.os (or c.s.m.systems)

| . . . it might be worth considering moving c.s.m.hypercard into
| c.s.m.applications.hypercard.

I like the idea of moving hypercard into the c.s.m.app.* hierarchy.
Let's call it c.s.m.app.db.hypercard, then people will know "app.db"
must mean "applications.database" if they already know what hypercard
is.

| Another possible sub-group might by c.s.m.system for discussion of
| finder, multi-finder, System 7.0, DAs, INITs, DRVRs, Royal fonts, etc.

I like, but let's create c.s.m.app... first.
--
 /\ Mark M Mehl, alias Superticker (Supertickler to some)
<><> Internet: mehl@atanasoff.cs.IAstate.edu
 \/ UUCP: {{mailrus,umix}!sharkey,hplabs!hp-lsd,uunet}!atanasoff!mehl
Disclaimer: You got to be kidding; who would want to claim anything I said?