I find the "naming convention" on the PWG ftp server to be total
incomprehensable. Since the Unix, Win 95, OS/2, Win NT, and Mac
all allow long file names and since the Win 3.1 folks can rename
as they download, it is time to move to more meaningful names.
Inplementing some naming standard that makes it easy to sort,
etc. would be a good idea but lets have a few more characters
available so the newbies can find what they are looking for more
quickly.
Jay: As far as laying out some plan like Larry has tried to do I think
as secretary and owner of the ftp server, you are probably
the appropriate person. I'll put some time on the Jan meeting
agenda if you would like. Just don't make the plan so tough
that people can't post things there quickly.
Don
To: pwg%pwg.org @ interlock.lexmark.com @ SMTP
cc: (bcc: Don Wright)
From: jkm%underscore.com @ interlock.lexmark.com (JK Martin) @ SMTP
Date: 11/14/96 07:35:54 PM
Subject: Standard filenames for PWG ftp server files?
Tom Hastings just made some excellent suggestions:
> Could you please stick with 8.3 file naming. Some of us are still with
> Windows 3.11. I think we can get the date for conference calls into
> 8 characters and some indication that its a conference call (maybe cc?).
How many other people prefer a limitation of 8.3 filenames? We really
need to know this to pursue a plan for filename standardization.
(Personally, I would prefer that we *not* force ourselves to only 8.3 names,
but I don't want to go crazy with loooonnnnggg names, either.)
> It might be nice to include the year in the file name too, since the
> date sometimes becomes today's date when copying files.
>> If you put the year first, month next and day last, then it sorts by date.
>> Maybe something like:
>> cc961113.doc .pdf .ps .txt
>> for weekly conference calls
>> and
>> ipp-9611.doc .pdf .ps .txt
>> for monthly ipp meetings.
Excellent, excellent idea, Tom. Many other working groups use this kind
of mechanism, both for sorting purposes AND simple name space administration.
As I recall, both Harry Lewis and Ron Bergman have been following this kind
of technique with the PMP and JMP projects for some time now.
All we need to do is standardize the approach for ALL files maintained
on the PWG ftp server.
Following is an extract of a mail message posted by Larry Stein that
describes the administrative approach the IEEE 1284 groups have taken
along the lines of document naming and format requirements:
> PAPER PROCEDURE:
> In order to maintain a trail for all presentations and material reviewed at
> a meeting, we will institute a naming convention and log for all papers.
> The naming convention will be:
> xxyyiiiz.pdf
> where: xx = year
> yy = month submitted
> iii = initials of preparer
> z = number of submission
>> Example: 9608LAS1.pdf would be the name for a proposal submitted by Larry A.
> Stein in August 1996, first proposal.
>> Adobe acrobat PDF is the prefered format for all papers loaded onto the ftp
> server. PostScript (.PS) is OK. Text files (txt) are OK in a pinch. This
> can be translated to PDF.
One of the other IEEE 1284 participants added an important idea worth
considering for our group:
> It would be nice if someone could maintain a list on the FTP server
> correlating file name to paper content. Sort of a "readme" file. The list
> Walt sent out via e-mail shows what I mean:
>> Filename Description of Paper
> -------- --------------------
> 9606WJS1.pdf P1284.4 Datalink and Address Server Proposal
>> ieee0796.ps Raw postscript file of slide Joe and I presented at
> the July meeting. Could not get this into PDF.
> ieee0796.pcl PCL version of ieee0796.ps
>> 9608WJS1.pdf P1284.4 Process Proposal
>> 9608WJS2.pdf P1284.4 Proposal Evalution Criteria Proposal
>> 9608WJS3.pdf P1284.4 Process Proposal and criteria presentation
Tom Hastings has done a great job in submitting his work to the PWG ftp
server, including consistent filenames and data types.
Can the PWG make a "policy" change in this area for the betterment of
all? The mess of filenames on the server has been a problem for quite
sometime, and now is the time to do something about it, given the expected
high volume of material expected from the new IPP project.
Hmmm... Is this something that I (as PWG Secretary) can simply mandate?
Are there any objections out there?
...jay
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-- JK Martin | Email: jkm at underscore.com --
-- Underscore, Inc. | Voice: (603) 889-7000 --
-- 41C Sagamore Park Road | Fax: (603) 889-2699 --
-- Hudson, NH 03015-4915 | Web: http://www.underscore.com --
----------------------------------------------------------------------