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