Re: Re WIT
John C. Mallery <JCMa@REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU>
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 1994 00:30:41 +0200
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Message-id: <19940609222304.0.JCMA@JEFFERSON.AI.MIT.EDU>
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Reply-To: JCMa@REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU
Originator: www-talk@info.cern.ch
Sender: www-talk@www0.cern.ch
Precedence: bulk
From: John C. Mallery <JCMa@REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU>
To: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www0.cern.ch>
Subject: Re: Re WIT
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 1994 17:29 EDT
From: shafer@oclc.org (Keith Shafer)
Tony Sanders writes:
> Terry Allen writes:
> > I agree, the idea is good, but the implementation is too clumsy
> > to be practical if we can use email instead.
>
> It is a little bit harder to use but what is going to happen when we have
> 1500 email messages on this topic? Who is going to organize all the
> thoughts so that we could ever hope to go back over it all and apply the
> information over the long term.
I have to wonder why we would ever really want to
archive 1500 email messages on a single topic -
sociological studies aside. It's kind of like
recording all the conversations at the coffee pot.
What happens when there are 1500 TOPICS?
Not so. When you are capturing typed links you are building a knowledge
representation of sorts. As the ratio of links to opaque structures declines,
there is more and more that you can do with it automatically. Recall that the
goal is to reduce transactions costs for people by automating as much as
possible by means of elegant designs or smart programs.
A well-structure design discussion with supersedes links becomes the
documentation for the design. The more complex the design, the more
individual decisions and the more debates about which way to commit and why.
Current email archives for high volume lists or newsgroup are just too hard to
cope with for people with real jobs.