W0RLI > PSBBS 17.07.96 22:24l 38 Lines 1903 Bytes #-9106 (0) @ WW
BID : W0RLI35187
Read: DO3SMK GUEST
Subj: Re: More ideas.
Sent: 960717/0754 35187@W0RLI.OR.USA.NOAM
ZL2VAL wrote to PSBBS on Wed Jul 17 04:13:51 1996:
> Please try to keep in mind that the people using the resulting program from
> the other side, EI; the USERS, have to be able to understand the commands
> when they log on. Why is it that the alternatives to FBB have such varrying
> commands? Try digiing down the chain and fugure out the various BBS`s
> encountered along the way, TSTHOST, JNOS, FBB. All have different commands,
> is it a plot to keep the ordinary peasants confused? How about the
> programmers using a set of commands common to the most widely used system,
> if there is one, and not one that can only be understood by a programmer?
The work to come up with a standard command set has not yet been done.
The group who produced the "forwarding specification", also known as
the "BBS Specification" discussed this issued, and determined that there
were two good reasons not to attempt it. First, there was no concensus
on which capabilities should be included in the spec. Second, the amount
of work was too great to be done in the time period available (one year).
Creating these specifications is very difficult, time consuming work.
At one point, we did have such a specification: there was only one bbs
code (mine) so there was only one command set. As soon as there were
more bbs codes, the different authors added different capability using
different commands. Now we have dozens of codes, each with their own
extentions to the basic commands (R, S, L, K, D, U, etc.).
Perhaps someone will come forward and volunteer to act as editor for
a specification for both the "Standard User BBS Command Set" and
the "Standard Sysop Capabilites Definition" documents ... or something
similar. This will be a large task. Plan on spending about one year.
Occam's 2nd rule: Eschew Obfuscation; Espouse Elucidation.
Read previous mail | Read next mail