Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 09:39:44 -0700
Reply-To: Bruce Rogers <gxx18300@GGR.CO.UK>
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>
From: Bruce Rogers <gxx18300@GGR.CO.UK>
Organization: Glaxo Wellcome
Subject: Re: protocol for newsgroups
Nya Murray wrote:
> Thank you, Melvin, thank you Clark.
> It's quite an interesting and involved process to set up a newsgroup!
> The reason I posted was because it has been occurring to me that I
> would rather like to see a separate group relating to SAS OOP (object
> oriented programming) type technology such as discussion about
> creating objects, discussion about FRAME technology, data warehousing,
> and the plethora of new SAS tools like the Rapid Warehousing Toolkit,
> the Data Warehouse Administrator and the Windows point & click report
> generator which are on their way to being released. Also to see the
> same depth of discussion on SCL techniques as there is on SAS. But I
> don't want to see sas-l refocus, as its current range is excellent. I
> guess SAS is just too big to fit into one newsgroup.
> Anyone else got a constructive opinion on this one?
The current SAS-L often contains very useful tips and answers for many
different aspects of SAS, including FRAME/SCL and general GUI issues,
alongside detailed STATS questions. This, I believe, is healthy and
should be encouraged.
One positive aspect to it is that it can bring the power of SAS as an
applications tool to the attention of many people who tend to regard it
as a STATS package only. Similarly, died-in-the-wool MACRO programmers
may begin to see the light and switch to SCL-based apps, which of course
we all want to see (at least, those of us who have an interest in better
So please drop the idea of seperate newsgroup(s) for different bits of
SAS, or this diversity may be lost.