Browse Prior Art Database

NETED: A Common Editor for the ARPA Network (RFC0569)

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000003660D
Original Publication Date: 1973-Oct-15
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2000-Sep-13
Document File: 7 page(s) / 18K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

M.A. Padlipsky: AUTHOR

Abstract

At the recent Resource Sharing Workshop, there was a somewhat surprising degree of consensus on what I had anticipated would the least popular aspect of the my "Unified User-Level Protocol" proposal: A number of the attendees agreed without argument that it would be a good thing to have "the same" context editor available on all Servers -- where "the same" refers, of course, to the user interface. We even agreed that "NETED" seemed to be a plausible common name. In view of the fact that the rest of the proposal didn't seem to capture anybody's imagination, though, it seemed to be a useful notion to separate out the common editor and make it the subject of a stand-alone proposal.

This text was extracted from a ASCII Text document.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 17% of the total text.

Network Working Group Mike Padlipsky

RFC 569/ NET-USING Memo 1 NET-USING

NIC # 18972 October 15, 1973

NETED: A Common Editor for the ARPA Network

BACKGROUND

At the recent Resource Sharing Workshop, there was a somewhat

surprising degree of consensus on what I had anticipated would the

least popular aspect of the my "Unified User-Level Protocol" proposal:

A number of the attendees agreed without argument that it would be

a good thing to have "the same" context editor available on all

Servers -- where "the same" refers, of course, to the user interface.

We even agreed that "NETED" seemed to be a plausible common name. In

view of the fact that the rest of the proposal didn't seem to capture

anybody's imagination, though, it seemed to be a useful notion to

separate out the common editor and make it the subject of a

stand-alone proposal.

My resolve to come up with the following was further strengthened at

the the organizing meeting of the Network User Interest Group, which

followed the Workshop. Being primarily concerned with user issues,

this group was downright enthusiastic about the prospect of a common

editor. Indeed, this proposal has been reviewed by the group and is

endorsed by it.

REASONS

The need for a common editor might well be obvious to many readers.

They are encouraged to skip this section, which is for the benefit of

those who don't already see the light.

In the first place, it's almost axiomatic that to use a time-sharing

system, you have to be able to create files (/"datasets"/"segments").

Even if you're only using the Network to send "mail", you'd still like

to be able to create a file separately, so as to be able to edit it

before sending. And if you want to write a program -- or even make a

"runoff" source file -- you simply must be able to use some editor

command on the system at hand.

Unfortunately, there are even more editors than there are systems;

and each one has it own conventions and peculiarities. So "Network

users" (who use several Servers, as opposed to those who use the

Network only to access a particular system all the time) are faced

with the unpleasant chore of developing several sets of incompatible

reflexes if they want to get along. This can certainly be done. It

has been by a number of members of the Network Working Group.

NETED SPEC p.2

The real kicker, however, comes when we consider the needs of those

users -- who are coming into the Network community in ever-increasing

numbers -- who are not professional programmers. They just want to

get some work done, "on the Net" (that is, irrespective of which

operating system they might be talking to). They are likely to be

appalled rather than amused by having to learn a dozen ways of getting

to first base. Therefore, it seems clear than not only do we need a

common editor, but we also need a simple common editor.

CHOICES

Simplicity...