RE: [xml-dev] [OT] Missing posts

["Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>]

Is this part of the "worse is better... we should 
allow the web to fail" sort of thing, or are you 
relying on the maintainer to keep all internals 
oriented to your application?  I don't mean that 
to be a mean question, but to point out where 
some of the problems of very large internetted 
apps and services are even if the tech works.

I know this is frustrating.  But there 
is a sense here of the unreliability and costs 
of web-based solutions precisely because of a  
technical approach that says it is ok to fail 
therefore, worse is better, yet on the other 
hand, requiring data sources that are free to 
access to provide perfect service.  One can only commit assets 
based on the QOS numbers of the implementation 
and that means either humans do the work, or 
machines do.  TANSTAAFL.

Imagine web services for ASPs without QOS numbers. 
Part of the competitive edge will be the ability 
to sustain that service reliably.

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Leigh Dodds [mailto:ldodds@ingenta.com]

It's annoying and demoralising to invest a large amount of time 
abstracting useful information from this list, only to have it be 
undone by a lack of commitment to stable archive URLs.

It undermines the usefulness in having an archive in the first 
place.

Is there any chance that this will/can be remedied?