On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 10:33:26AM -0700, Dwight K. Elvey wrote:
For an archive, one should have the least and
simplest
amount of encoding or remoteness from the original as
possible.
Yes, but now we can argue semantics until the cows come home. What
*is* the simplest amount of encoding, and more importantly, what is
the *original* itself? Is it ASCII? If so, is it ASCII in a file
on a disk, or printed out on paper? Is it just the letters
themselves? Or is it the *information* represented by the ASCII
that is the original? How far up do you want to go? The ideas
represented by the communicated information?
That's why I find format discussions so frustrating. If I write an
article discussing some programming topic, and I do it in a straight
text editor and save as an ASCII text file on a floppy disk, and
then compress that file using RAR (which adds error-correcting code
to the archive) and distribute it online, what is "the original"?
Is it the RAR archive... or the extracted text file... or the
information itself contained in the file?
Still, you have shut out many MAC users
No, it's a .ZIP file. ZIP for Mac has existed since the early 1990s
and as I wrote before there is a source code distribution ZIP
archive extractor so...
and some of those that are so far in the past that
they are still running on a 8080 CP/M machine.
...they can compile the ZIP extractor from source. Unless the 8080
CP/M machine doesn't have a C compiler, in which case it would most
likely have no reason whatsoever to extract the data in the first
place (common practice is to extract it on a capable platform, then
transfer over to the older machine).
Imagine that some future archivist digs up Sellams
library.
He must first realize that he needs something that interprets
x86 instructions to unwind the encoding. He then has to figure
out what the purpose of the data was.
I think figuring out the purpose will be exponentially harder than
finding an x86 box to extract the data. Besides, as previously
discussed, the x86 factor is moot due to the availability of
source-code archive extractor distributions.
Many here have made the assumption that the
information would
smoothly be moved along to the next current media and retranslated
to the next handy compaction or encapsulation tool.
The real world isn't like that. There will be gaps in the
maintenance. For many reasons, like budgets or just apathy.
A good archivist need to do the best to anticipate this
and consider this as part of their strategy.
I do agree with you on this point. I just think shouting "ASCII
only" is too short-sighted.
--
Jim Leonard
http://www.oldskool.org/ Email: trixter at
oldskool.org
Like PC games? Help support the MobyGames database:
http://www.mobygames.com/
Or taste a slice of the demoscene at
http://www.mindcandydvd.com/