A few points to address here, and again I'm not trying to upset anyone.
First off, Mr.Blaine started this entire "change the format" discussion
in alt.config and moved it here when I and others suggested that the right
way to present something was to discuss it with the people who are doing the
work. For that, I'd like to thank him. However, I suggest he change his
.signature, as it is over 80 columns wide.
I'd also like to suggest that he put some sort of FAQ together, with a minimum
of 800 lines of text. He's never done the work, thus I cannot take his
opinions to heart until he's experienced it. (And my FAQ is small and
informal!)
Thanks to all who gave their honest opinions on this subject, BTW, pro and
con. Proves you care.
On the subject of standard formats, Steve is right. ASCII is the standard
format. I've been on the net for six years and across something like 11
machines. A good half of those had no text readers to deal with anything
but ASCII, and the users were usually happy enough with getting the info in
the first place that complaints were few. A great majority of users and
machines are not sophisticated, high-tech types. The systems connect with
what they have and the users search for knowledge from the ground up.
Of the machines online in my area, most are public- or employee-access for
non-programmers. I'll venture to say the largest percentage of users
don't know anything about LaTeX and don't care, so long as they can do
what they wish. Certain FAQ keepers who have posted (myself included) don't
understand a lot of the acronymical references that have been used, either.
We just put out the facts.
It took me 3 months to compile my FAQ and takes about 4 hours a week to
keep it updated (when I put in the time). And it's geared to gamers.
Role-players. They appreciate the content, not the strict adherance to
format. I've found a great many users like that, particularly not the
ones in the comp.* hierarchy (which tends to be more experienced user-
oriented, for obvious reasons) who want answers, not numbers.
Again, I have nothing but the greatest admiration for you folks out there
with multi-part, large-volume, obvoiusly well-researched FAQs. I will
never presume to tell you anything, instead I am your student.
(I feel like I've just paraphrased everything Ken McVay has already said.
Remember, Ken, imitation is supposed to be sincere flattery... I agree
with you and didn't mean to use your words as my own.)
Now to address individual points:
Jeff Blaine said:
> ...I know many of you reading this are about
> to break a vein because you feel so laboured just to have to write
> FAQ lists that it should be in "whatever damn format I want, who
> cares if people reading it can't convert it. That's the way *I*
> want it because I'm writing it."
> Very sad.
Jeff, you've never written a FAQ. Until you were informed of this
mailing list, you weren't even aware of its existance.
Yes, there are people here who don't like someone popping out of the
blue and telling us we're not doing things good enough for him.]
Sad? No. What is sad is that the uniniated think they can tell the
experienced how to go about their projects.
You posted to alt.config that the people who do keep FAQs don't like having
their creativity bridled. The way you mentioned this was, to my eyes,
rather condescending. I say again, do not presume to know what you have
not experienced.
I am fully in favour of a template format, in fact I'd have welcomed one
wholeheartedly when I began my project. Just don't tell me that an ASCII
text format with a full contents section and a keyword reference is
wrong. I won't listen.
Oscar Nierstrasz <oscar@cui.unige.ch> says:
> Rather than "resenting" suggestions to standardize the format, I
> greatly appreciate the efforts of people to make this information more
> accessible. After all, why are we doing this? (The resentment is
> neither pompous nor pushy, but does seem short-sighted to me.)
I know of no machine connected in any way to the Internet that cannot or
does not handle straight-ASCII text. There is no more accessible format
than that. I'm writing for people, not for machines.
> So I'm afraid I can't sympathize with the attitude that: "if they want
> it done differently they ought to do it, not tell others how". It's
> just not realistic. I have tried to write some software that will
> automatically convert selected non-standard FAQs into some standard
> that could then be broken into hypertext, but it's not easy -- it
> really should be done when the FAQ is originally written, or not at all.
Not realistic? If I stopped writing my FAQ it would not get written at
all. Most of us have taken on an onerous task in compiling and presenting
this information; it is not our _duty_ to anyone. So I see absolutely
nothing unreasonable or unrealistic in telling folks if they don't like
what I'm doing, they can do it themselves.
> I *can* understand that a single fixed format will not be appropriate
> for all FAQs, and that some FAQ maintainers will nevertheless be
> unwilling to adopt a particular format for various reasons, but that
> just means that we should go through the exercise of trying to identify
> conventions that would accommodate as many FAQs as possible.
>
> A compendium of different FAQ styles would help, or even a list of
> responses of the form:
>
> "The XXX FAQ wouldn't work with the proposed format because ..."
>
> Then we constructively evaluate the proposal and perhaps come up with
> some reasonable alternatives.
Apologies for the long quote, but here I agree. Don't set anything in
concrete, make it easy and consensual for the people volunteering their
time and allow for concessions where the standard wouldn't fit.
Oscar didn't comment on my statement that I'd welcome a template format.
I'm not against a base from which to work, I'm against being forced into
something I don't want.
Kent Landfield said (in part):
"This type of attitude will only drive FAQ list writers away from
contributing."
There it is in a nutshell. Not a one of us _has_ to do what we are doing.
We do it because we've volunteered to spread information across Usenet and
the Internet. If someone tells me I must do things their way, I will simply
cease to do it. Not because I don't love assembling and posting my FAQ,
but because I'd then feel that the prevailing attitude is that I am
obligated to do so, which I am not.
Every time I'm thanked for the contents of my FAQ, I feel gratified. When
I'm corrected, challenged, or supplimented, I'm gratified that people have
read my information and feel it important enough to make accurate.
That is why I do it.
Aesop's Fable of the man with the mule: You can't please everyone. You
shouldn't try.
- Britt
Keeper of the Painting Guidelines and FAQ for rec.games.miniatures
-- = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = tierna@agora.rain.com = "Prrrrrrrrtp?" = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = -- Ronmoninoff Puffball Keeeton = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved