Date:         Fri, 20 Jun 2003 14:46:51 -0400
Reply-To:     "Fehd, Ronald J. (PHPPO)" <rjf2@CDC.GOV>
Sender:       "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         "Fehd, Ronald J. (PHPPO)" <rjf2@CDC.GOV>
Subject:      Re: %include versus SAS Autocall Facility
Content-Type: text/plain

> From: Lex Jansen

> libnames: I even want to take it a step further.

> The advantage of setting up a standard folder structure, with
> a well-defined purpose for every folder takes away the need
> for users to define file references or libnames.

> Get organized!   <---<<<

which makes it easier to one day change the sign to:

Stay Organized!

<sigh> ... one of these daze

[snip]
> Let's get global now.
> Have the same structure and AUTOEXEC.SAS, global standard
> macros, etc.. in US, Japan, Europe.... Because all libnames
> are defined in the AUTOEXEC.SAS (and relative !!) we can just
> copy the program from the US to Japan and it still runs
> without ANY modification.
>
> Needless to say that the key is STANDARDIZATION.

'ditto'
well, I'll stay speechless for this one

for an earlier thread that addresses common folder naming conventions
see
check our most excellent archives:
http://www.listserv.uga.edu/archives/sas-l.html
      search for:
subject contains: poll: directory structure
author's address:
           since: Sept 2000
           until: Dec  2000

Ron Fehd  the macro maven  CDC Atlanta GA USA RJF2@cdc.gov