Internet Info 1997 December/Internet_Info_CD-ROM_Walnut_Creek_December_1997.iso/faqs/alt/config/Guidelines_on_Usenet_Newsgroup_Names

Internet Message Format | 1997-09-28 | 7KB

Path: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!panix!news.gw.com!news.deshaw.com!do-not-use-path-to-reply
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 1997 08:00:51 GMT
Supersedes: <[e-mail]>
Expires: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 09:00:51 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Guidelines on Usenet Newsgroup Names
Newsgroups: news.announce.newusers,news.groups,news.admin.misc,alt.config,alt.answers,news.answers
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mark Moraes)
Followup-To: news.newusers.questions
Approved: [e-mail] (Mark Moraes)
Lines: 125
Xref: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu news.announce.newusers:3149 news.groups:302573 news.admin.misc:63917 alt.config:135580 alt.answers:29224 news.answers:113184

Original-author: [e-mail]
Archive-name: usenet/creating-newsgroups/naming/part1
Last-change: 13 Jun 1995 by [e-mail] (Mark Moraes)
Changes-posted-to: news.misc

        Guidelines on Usenet Newsgroup Names

         "To-day we have naming of parts."

This document is intended to be a primer for use by those involved in
creating new Usenet news groups, namely in the "comp", "humanities",
"misc", "news", "rec", "sci", "soc" and "talk" hierarchies.  The same
principles may be used with other hierarchies, but those are beyond the
scope of this document.

Usenet news group names are structured, hierarchic, taxonomic but not
definitive.  They are intended to help users find what they want and news
administrators manage their systems, to the benefit of their users.
By understanding each of these concepts, you can understand how to
select suitable names for new news groups.

Structured

    News group names are structured into parts separated by dots, for
    example "rec.pets.dogs". Each part may be up to 14 characters
    long, and should consist only of letters, digits, "+" and "-",
    with at least one letter.

Hierarchic

    Names fall into clear hierarchies - for example all computer-related
    groups are in comp.  Each may be sub-divided into second, third, and
    lower level hierarchies, such as sci.physics and comp.sys.sun, by
    adding more parts to the basic name. The first part is the most
    general (sci or comp), the second more specific, and so on.  The
    last part completes the actual group name.  As each part implies a
    further level, words at the same level are included into one part
    using a hyphen - e.g. misc.invest.real-estate rather than
    misc.invest.estate.real, which would imply that a real was a type
    of estate!

Taxonomic

    Taxonomy is the science of the classifying things - for example
    species in biology, or books in a library.   Group names classify
    subjects into areas and hierarchies.  Getting these right is not
    easy, for you have to fit in with those already there, and also
    allow for likely future growth.

Not definitive

    News group names are inclusive rather than definitive.  That is to
    say, a group name defines an area in which a message may be posted
    if there is no other group with a better name fit.  The name does
    not define exact limits to the group, eliminating subjects that do
    not exactly match the definition.

Helping users
    The group name is often the only clue the user has about the group
    without reading a selection of articles from the group.  There are
    currently over 1300 Usenet news groups, and well over 10,000 groups
    including all the other news hierarchies from alt to zer.  It is
    not possible for users to read every group to find out which are of
    interest to them.   Similarly, even a very popular group will only
    be read by 1% of all Usenet users.  So the name has to make sense to
    the 99% who are not reading the group.   It should be clear enough
    to avoid users posting "what is this?" articles, and to ensure that
    those who *would* like to know more about the subject do recognise
    the group's purpose and start to read it and join in.  Also, bear in
    mind that Usenet is global, that users come from many different
    cultures, and that for many, English is not their first language.

    This leads to some strong guidelines about choosing names:

    - Group similar subjects together, in the same hierarchy if
    possible, so that people looking for a related subject will have a
    good idea where to find it.   It is often better to put a new group
    with others in an approximately right "place" than to insist on
    getting the name precise at the expense of putting the group in
    some obscure area that many potential users will not look at.

    - Create general groups before creating very specific ones.

    - Dnt Abrv8.  Do not abbreviate or use obscure names.  Your
    abbreviation may well be recognised by someone else as meaning
    something entirely different, especially if English is a second
    language to them.  At the moment, Usenet transport limitations
    restrict the length of any component to 14 characters.  This may
    sometimes force abbreviation, in this case, create as meaningful
    an abbreviation as possible within 14 characters.

    - Use English words in group names.  The articles in a group should
    use whatever language is appropriate for that group, but group names
    should use English as that is the one language that can be
    understood by almost all Usenet users.

Helping news administrators
    No site now has the disk space to carry 10,000 news groups and keep
    all their articles for weeks.  So news administrators have to be
    selective in which groups they carry and how long they keep the
    articles of each group (expiry times).   Yet with so many groups,
    they cannot manage each one separately.  So they make use of
    the hierarchic property, and control news in hierarchies.  For
    example,  one may keep comp articles longer than rec, another may
    decide not to take any comp.sys.ibm.* groups as none of their users
    reads them.   This is the other reason hierarchies are so important,
    and why a new group should always be fitted into an existing
    hierarchy if at all possible.  Some new group proposers think it
    does not matter if their group does not fit in to this scheme,
    assuming that news administrators who don't want it can select it
    out individually: this is a mistaken view.  Every group that a site
    gets that its users do not read, makes less disk space and so
    shorter expiry times for the groups they *do* want.

What's next?
    Think about these guidelines before naming your new news group.

    Remember that name mistakes made in the past when Usenet was much
    smaller, or now in uncontrolled parts of the net like alt, are no
    reason to make more mistakes now.  On the contrary, now is the time
    to correct some of those past mistakes.

    And if you still need advice, ask [e-mail].

--