Mark > Please try and keep this professional. I have no idea what you are referring to, but it doesn't add to the discussion.
The explanation for this has been sent privately since it refers to another thread where it can be fully understood in context. > Perhaps you don't understand ... > ... or isn't catchy enough. Again, a total loss! What is the point about this quite apart from the fact that your assumptions about what I do and don't know are laughably awry? As far as the structure of z/OS and specifically Communications Server are concerned, I understand very well, and I had the essence of to what you refer explained by an IBM developer while being driven to dinner back in 1999. I'm now going to try to make another effort to try to see what you are on about but beware I may well no longer have quite such a sweet demeanour if I fail. ... The only point I can find - and it's probably as well I found *something* since the blood pressure treatment needs to be scaled back - is the following: > <the dread 3 characters> is an abbreviation for Unix System Services. which I still can't see relates to anything in the "Perhaps ... enough" sentences. As for the abbreviation, in the outside world that would be accepted - assuming anyone in the outside world actually wanted to talk about UNIX or System or Services. However we are not in the outside world and we need to be accurate and unambiguous and it's a simple fact with which some are having such a hard time that the dread 3 characters are already documented as meaning something else - OK? Incidentally, it's when the discussion gets to this level of inanity I start to have sympathy with the gentlemen, for whom I have a mind's eye portrait, probably fanciful and unjustified, corresponding to characters with whom I would not relish having to spend time, who perform the post-writing equivalent of throwing their hands in the air or risk getting a large bruise on their forehead with the concomitant hope that the wall was soundly built. - > You casting a very wide net in your disparaging remarks about IBM developers. I don't believe so at all. Below I have an explanation of an aberration around the edges of what was done but not what is achieved - which, although I don't know it, I assume with confidence is excellent. As for manual authors - and the editors who are supposed to check these things - I was aware a long time ago that they were underresourced - and got my fingers rapped by a "suit" for saying so in a "forum". I even once sat in on a review meeting and judged the relative importance in the pecking order[1]. I guess it must happen all the time that the coffee room chit-chat redolent with loose terminology finds that loose terminology infecting the authors' work. > One example used in this discussion often is the USS abbreviation in Health Checker. This is a relatively new component of z/OS and I'm sure it went through all the formal processes, yet USS is used as the abbreviation for the check names and the check owner. By definition, whoever wrote the Health Checker did *not* go though the correct process in determining whether the labels were correct usage. Since you - and the Swiss gentleman - and probably the newly-discovered moniker HD - hang your hat on this aberration so much, the explanation which comes most easily to mind is a call to get something out yesterday which deals with what the Health Checker does and, while I - in my turn - am sure that the checks that get made were defined by IBM development sages, the actual programming was given to a probably very clever student - or lately student - who wasn't versed in development procedures and the "suits" didn't care because they really wanted the Health Checker out the door the day before yesterday. I used the same idea here: http://alabamamaps.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1105&L=ibm- main&T=0&F=&S=&P=27426 Of course that's just a guess but there has to be some explanation why the Health Checker is so "out of line" and the z/OS bookshelf manuals - Health Checker references and a very few stray cats excepted - completely "in line". As John Eells strongly implied, there is such an internal procedure and the relevant IBM - try to keep bow in time with stroke[2] - web page is the following, mentioned for the umpteenth time: http://www-01.ibm.com/software/globalization/terminology/ And I really expect you to bother to look this John Eells post up - it's so easy - rather than my having to inflame the Kirks of this world by bulking up my post with the full text: http://alabamamaps.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0907&L=ibm- main&T=0&F=&S=&P=198809 - [1] I'd better be careful because there are those out there who would mistake any description of actual experience as "ego-polishing" or something like that! I'm probably alright since they are unlikely to read the posts in detail! [2] I guess there may be someone looking after the web pages who changes the pictures and the inspiring messages from time to time so don't delay or - again - you won't have a clue what I am talking about! - Chris Mason On Wed, 4 May 2011 14:15:13 -0500, Mark Zelden <[email protected]> wrote: >On Wed, 4 May 2011 13:28:30 -0500, Chris Mason <[email protected]> wrote: > >>Mark - who clearly hasn't cleaned the egg off yet[1] > >Please try and keep this professional. I have no idea what >you are referring to, but it doesn't add to the discussion. > >> >>> IBM didn't misuse it. >> >>Wrong! >> >>> The description of the parm used "official" (ahem) IBM terminology. >> >>More wrong - if possible! >> > >Not the parm... which is just an 8 char name, the DESCRIPTION: > >"USSHOME >The USSHOME system initialization parameter specifies the name and path >of the root directory for CICS® TS 4.1 files on z/OS® UNIX. " > ~~~~~~~~~~ > > > >>> USS is still a convenient abbreviation for Unix System Services ... >> >> >>> ... and all the current pubs are still called Unix System Services something >>or other (not z/OS Unix something or other). >> >>And your point is ... ? >> > >I had just made the point. USS is an abbreviation for Unix System Services. > >>I thought I might have an idea what your point was until I checked the >>current V1R12 z/OS UNIX bookshelf - yes, I trust you noticed, "z/OS UNIX" - >>although it does differ from your "z/OS Unix" by using upper case - and, >>looking in the most general manual, the "Planning" manual, I noted that >>Chapter 1 was "Introduction to z/OS UNIX". >> >>http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi- bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/BPXZB2B0/1.0 >> > >Perhaps you don't understand how the OS is packaged and documented. > >The "z/OS VnRn" prefaces all the element shelves / book names for the most >part. So you can ignore that. Prior to z/OS substitute "OS/390". The >element / component names come after the "z/OS VnRn". MVS is a component, >DFSMS is a component, Security Server, Communication Server and >Unix System Services are all components of z/OS. > >If you had read more than the chapter heading, you would have seen >the first sentences which read: > >"The UNIX System Services element of z/OS is a UNIX operating >environment, implemented within the z/OS operating system. It is >also known as z/OS UNIX. " > >z/OS UNIX itself is just another form of abbreviation because Unix System >Services is too long a name I guess or isn't catchy enough. > >> >>> Just because IBM started using z/OS unix doesn't mean every software MF >>component known to man kind is going to change their parms / keywords (for >>example, ZUXHOME for CICS SIT). >> >>Ditto! >> >>What's to "change"?[2] It was wrongly composed in the first place by pure >>carelessness - egged (sorry) on by misuse by the ignorant. It was careless >>because John Eells - I believe - implied that there is a formal process whereby >>developers can discover whether implied initialisms and other abbreviations >>have been taken already and careless developers may very well imagine they >>are allowed to bypass that process when they find others extensively misusing >>a particular initialism. >> > >You casting a very wide net in your disparaging remarks about IBM >developers. One example used in this discussion often is the USS >abbreviation in Health Checker. This is a relatively new component >of z/OS and I'm sure it went through all the formal processes, yet >USS is used as the abbreviation for the check names and the check >owner. > >Mark >-- >Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
