On Thu, 13 Mar 1997 16:57 -0500, Cliff Baynon <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > I have a question.... Is there any way to change the daily mailing list > digests to be called something other than "digests" ??? Several Internet domains have registered usage of the word "digest": Computer Digest Ltd. <DIGEST.COM> Digest Business and Law Journal <LAWDIGEST.COM> Digest Group Publications <DIGESTGROUP.COM> Digest Group Publications <DGP.ORG> Digest Quest <DIGESTQUEST.COM> and you have another "competitor" for the usage of the word 'digest', namely, the Internet RFC #1153, dating from 1990. Reference: ftp://ftp.cs.ubc.ca/pub/archive/doc/rfc/rfc1153.txt +--- ! Network Working Group F. Wancho ! Request for Comments: 1153 WSMR ! April 1990 ! ! Digest Message Format ! ! Status of this Memo ! ! This memo describes the de facto standard Digest Message Format. ! This is an elective experimental protocol. Distribution of this memo ! is unlimited. ! ! Background ! ! High traffic volume large mailing lists began to appear on the net in ! the mid-70s. The moderators of those lists developed a digest ! message format to enclose several messages into one composite message ! for redistribution to the mailing list addressees. This format ! reduces the mailer load in proportion to the number of messages ! contained within a digest message, and conserves network bandwidth by ! reducing the size of the headers of the enclosed messages. ! ! This RFC documents the digest message format so that others may ! follow this format in creating (digestifying) and separating ! (undigestifying) digest messages to maintain compatibility with the ! programs expecting this de facto standard. Any editorial functions ! performed at the discretion of a digest moderator, such as discarding ! submissions, editing content to correct spelling and punctuation ! errors, inserting comments, and reformatting paragraphs to conform to ! width conventions are beyond the scope of this memo. ! ! This memo describes the de facto standard Digest Message Format. It ! is not meant to supersede nor replace the generic message ! encapsulation format described in RFC 934. It merely documents a ! particular message encapsulation format that existed well before RFC ! 934 was published and continues to be the format of choice for digest ! messages. ! ! ... <<SNIP by KLASSEN>> ... +--- > I ask because there is a pigeon magazine called the "Pigeon Digest", and > it's [sic] editor mentioned that people are beginning to refer to the pigeon > email list as "the digest", when that is what the magazine was referred > to for many years. > I do not have a problem either way with this, and explained to the editor > the below explanation. However I was wondering what you think of this. > > > Cliff: I know I should have brought this up before now, but I am becoming > >more and more concerned about the pigeon listserve's use of the name Digest. > > I am now seeing the listserve refer to Digest article which are not my > > Digest. I never realized that your listserve would break into this area. > > Several years ago, the Pigeon Debut started our as the Pigeon Digest > > but after I pointed out that the name Digest had been legally reserved in > > Oklahoma for my publication, their name was changed to the Debut. > > Could you please think of another reference for your listserve other > > than Digest? it would help both of us out. Sorry. Keep up the good work. > > Gene