Subject:
|
Re: Request for groups: movies/LEGO Studio
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.nntp
|
Date:
|
Mon, 18 Dec 2000 13:18:33 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
126 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.nntp, Todd Lehman writes:
> > What say you, O Toddly One?
I gotta remember that one!!
> I think those names sound like a good start, but if one is a subset of the
> other (that is, both are for movies but one is more general than the other),
> then they ought to be named lugnet.x and lugnet.x.y rather than lugnet.x and
> lugnet.x.y -- if that makes any sense.
Not really. Tell me the difference between
lugnet.x and lugnet.x.y (the first one)
and
lugnet.x and lugnet.x.y (the second one)
if you would...
But I agree with your thesis, I think. Specific usually ought to be a subset
of general.
The problem here is... is a lego movie a kind of software, a kind of
publication or a kind of rendering? The answer is all three, of course, but
with strict hierarchical groups no matter where you put it you can argue
it's wrongly placed.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Request for groups: movies/LEGO Studio
|
| (...) LOL! OOops, too much coffee this morning. It's not my fault. I just woke up. :-) I meant lugnet.x & lugnet.x.y vs. lugnet.x & lugnet.y, naturally. :-) (...) That's what I'm afraid of. There's so much overlap, but each one gets into specific (...) (24 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Request for groups: movies/LEGO Studio
|
| (...) I think those names sound like a good start, but if one is a subset of the other (that is, both are for movies but one is more general than the other), then they ought to be named lugnet.x and lugnet.x.y rather than lugnet.x and lugnet.x.y -- (...) (24 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
