Regarding the relative utility of AFD/FUI and WWW, ...

On Sat, 30 May 1998, Pete Weiss wrote:
> Much of all this was used before the WEB and HTTP became popular.  Don't
> know if that is related, though.

I think it is --lots more documents are being "distributed" today
_because_ of WWW, and people tend (in droves) to install them there
(often, probably, without knowing that such a beast as
LISTSERV/AFD/FUI ever existed).

I think that WWW has "distracted" many's attention from the utility of
FUI (at least, if not also AFD). It's precisely the lack of useful FUI
which makes WWW ugly (in that limited sense). Think about it --on WWW
sites, one hopes and prays to find a "What's New" page/directory that
will hint as to where the repeat visitor to the site should look for new
material. But, even then, a visitor is face with 1) having to actually
visit the site in a timely manner (i.e., often enough to be able to trip
across a _fresh_ update should there be an update), 2) sift through all
the "what's new"  titles/pages to see if a title of interest to him is
"new" (i.e., presumably revised), and 3) retrieve the page/document.
That's not a very convenient replacement for the AFD/FUI service (nor is
it a very friendly native WWW service!).

What would probably kill the need for AFD/FUI would be similar
functionality built into the WWW/HTTP (one would "subscribe" to a page
or a tree of pages, and be advised [PUI --Page Update Info?] or sent
[APD] the updated material). Is this on the WWW horizon? Does it already
exist!!??  Of course, I'd sometimes want to subscribe with the "C"
option --"Advise/Send Only if *C*ontent, not HTML, is revised".

Meanwhile, AFD/FUI still has a useful role to play.
:>)
Peter R