Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 17:31:19 -0500
Reply-To: Thomas Kalfas <kalfast@PPRD.ABBOTT.COM>
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>
From: Thomas Kalfas <kalfast@PPRD.ABBOTT.COM>
Subject: Re: Re[4]: protocol for newsgroups
In-Reply-To: "Kelley M. Berg" <kelleyb@mails.imed.com> "Re[4]: protocol for
newsgroups" (Sep 20, 4:22pm)
I know when I've been beat (upside the head)...
Why not just do as John suggested and incorporate the SAS product into the
subject. Perhaps we could put the product first followed by as much of a
description as you can fit, e.g. "MACRO:..."? For those who don't know which
product to use, how about "?:..."?
For starters (most taken right off the inside of the cover of any SAS
reference):
GRAPH or GRAF ETS
CICS (for REPLAY-CICS) QC
AF STAT
FSP OR
DMI IML
SCL CPE
ACCESS or AXS MXG
IMS RTERM or RTRM
VSAM CONNECT or CONN or CT (get it?)
SHARE or SHAR or CHER :*) ASSIST or ASST or (never mind)
Yet others?:
HUMR or FUN
HELP (for "I desperately need...")
DOCU (for "Is there any documentation on...")
GNRL (for "General discussion")
MISC (?)
RMB or RMP (for "Read my book (or paper)...please?" -- Don't mind me! I'm just
tired, and jealous! If I had written one, I'd be leaving them under people's
windshield wipers!)
Have a nice weekend SAS-Lers.
Tom
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sep 20, 4:22pm, Kelley M. Berg wrote:
> Subject: Re[4]: protocol for newsgroups
> I agree, policing the list would be difficult. I think most people
> would voluntarily use the assigned keywords if they were provided.
> Even if only 10% of the messages had a keyword in the subject line, a
> computer could easily index those messages and people could easily
> catagorize them. That would be 10% less work for everybody. Instead
> of focusing on whether people are willing to provide clear subject
> lines, it would be far more effective, in my opinion, to provide some
> direction on how to provide them.
>
> Kelley
>
>
> ______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
> Subject: Re: Re[2]: protocol for newsgroups
> Author: John Whittington <johnw@MAG-NET.CO.UK> at mails
> Date: 9/20/96 12:27 PM
>
>
> On Fri, 20 Sep 1996, "Kelley M. Berg" <kelleyb@MAILS.IMED.COM> wrote:
>
> > Would it be possible to assign a keyword to each class of SAS (ex AF,
> > MACRO, BASE, etc.) and include the primary keyword in the subject line
> > of any message sent to SAS-L? The keyword and definition list could
> > be sent along with the other information each new subscriber gets. If
> > the SAS-L messages were archived, they could be indexed based on these
> > keywords. At least the subject lines could be subdivided into the
> > catagories one would want for separate newsgroups.
>
> Kelley, this is an excellent idea - for which we periodically get pleas -
> but it's obvioulsy very difficult to 'police' unless we turn SAS-L into a
> semi-moderated list, with some human being 'checking' the subject lines.
> Then there would be a problem with the stuff mirrored from
> comp.soft-sys.sas, or whatever it's called these days.
>
> The greatest hope is probably to make regular please that people do include
> informative keywords in subject lines.
>
> BTW, Kelley, there is no 'if' about the SAS-L archives - they very much
> exist - right back to the day that SAS-L was born!
>
> Regards,
>
> John
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> Dr John Whittington, Voice: +44 1296 730225
> Mediscience Services Fax: +44 1296 738893
> Twyford Manor, Twyford, E-mail: johnw@mag-net.co.uk
> Buckingham MK18 4EL, UK CompuServe: 100517,3677
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>-- End of excerpt from Kelley M. Berg
--
Thomas Kalfas
System Developer
Abbott Laboratories
E-mail: kalfast@pprd.abbott.com
Phone: (847) 938-8101
Fax: (847) 935-1320
| 
