> To some extent, they have.  Specifically, they have built their own
> feature for automating creating lists (and record loading and output):
>  Millennium Load Scheduler.  And they'll be happy to sell that to you
> ... for tens of thousands of dollars.
>
>> Has III shown any interest in building in their own macros/automation
>> features to do the sorts of tasks for which we rely on Expect?

It appears that the interest is in building features that perform
specific tasks rather than in providing generic tools. This is a shame
IMO. What distinguished III from its competitors early on were easy to
use generic tools such as Create Lists. The load tables are great
because you can do neat things like URL rewriting as records are
loaded and use conditional logic to add special headings. At every IUG
conference, the most popular sessions are about integrating the system
with other applications.

Just as the hot dog cookers and other one trick wonders in the kitchen
are of very limited use, special purpose tools that attempt to define
your problem and solution are not nearly useful as generic ones in an
ILS context. I am still hoping that vendors will recognize that true
interoperability is a feature that increases the value of the ILS more
than just about anything else.

kyle