Chris, Thanks for acknowledging and supporting my point. Discussions on this list are certainly not "official" IBM communications. I believe, therefore, we should be as free to use USS as an abbreviation for Unix Systems Services as the folks who write IBM's APARs. Freer, in fact. I also believe that trying to encourage people to adhere to an IBM standard when IBM doesn't just seems pointless. But it's not my dog, so to speak.
My last post on this subject. Regards, Greg Shirey Ben E. Keith Company -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Chris Mason Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 6:11 AM Greg I see this is not the first time you have directed my attention to this misuse of USS by the folk responsible for writing up APARs and PTFs. There are "official" and "unofficial" documents. What you find on the online "bookshelves" and - I'm going to issue a challenge here - "announcement letters" is, to my mind, "official". What you find anywhere else is "unofficial" where nobody has bothered with what is "official" and with what might be ambiguous. This includes APAR/PTF text and red-whatevers - since others have appealed to redbooks for authority.[1] Note what I quoted from Steve Thompson in my recent reply to Mark Zelden. [1] Actually the ITSO (redbook) locations have/had editors who really should be checking for official abbreviations and ambiguities. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
