As long as you accept a complete line at a time, like multiple SDSF operator sessions, it should work, unless two people happen to issue the same command and it causes problems.
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:28 AM, John McDowell <jmcd...@gmail.com> wrote: > Mark, > > I understand what you are saying, the unintentional interleaving of multiple > user inputs, is something you can accept/overcome. This is one possible > resolution of allowing multiple concurrent uses of the "Integrated 3270", I > personally favor a model of one writer/multiple readers such is often > employed in the various screen sharing technologies found in many > conferencing solutions. (Note: I'm guessing the specific examples you offer > are not for the "Integrated 3270" but your essential point remains the same.) > > The only question in my mind is how sophisticated a mechanism is needed to > "pass the baton" (e.g. become the one writer). My initial thought is to keep > it simple, the first session is the writer, all subsequent sessions are > readers, the current writer can "pass the baton" to any reader. If there is > no inter-session awareness then the writer can simply "lay down the baton" > (e.g. surrender the write privilege) and any reader can then "pick it up". > > I'm sure there are other models that could be adopted but the key point that > I think we all agree on is that lifting the current restriction that prevents > multiple concurrent accessors of the "Integrated 3270" is very desirable. > > John McDowell > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
