In <8649425507335336.wa.zatlas1yahoo....@listserv.ua.edu>, on
12/01/2013
at 12:20 AM, "Ze'ev Atlas" <zatl...@yahoo.com> said:
>I have identified the defect pretty well,
You waved your hands; you never identified a problem that a central
repository would solve.
>you refuse to see that definition
That would have been impossible; there was no there there. You, OTOH,
refuse to see the similarities between MVS catalogs and Unix
directories.
>go to circular arguments
Nonsense.
>about semantics!
You don't have the faintest idea what semantics are.
>I will explain rather than define: In z/OS you are confined to 44
>characters and limited to however many levels could be expressed
>within that limit, but you do not need to tell the system where
>the file resides because that information is stored in the catalog.
Except when it isn't.
>In Unix, you do not have those length and level limitations, but
>you need to be explicit in describing where the file is
That's nonsense.
>or go through the trouble of creating symbolic links.
Symbolic links provide an alias; they don't say where something is.
Alias resolution is as much a factor for legacy MVS catalogs and data
sets as it is for Unix paths.
>Both sides are awkward, require too much memorization and each one
>has a glaring defect as identified above.
The defect that you "identified" is imaginary.
>PLEASE DO NOT GET INTO SEMANTICS
The difference between having a usable backup and not having one is
"only semantics".
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
