Re: First cut at minimal digest format FAQ

Steve Summit (scs@eskimo.com)
Tue, 30 Nov 1993 06:36:06 -0800

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Dave Schweisguth: "Re: First cut at minimal digest format FAQ"
Previous message: tomas@cae.wisc.edu: "REQUEST: FlameWar Digest"

In <9311300315.AA02480@ferret.ocunix.on.ca>, Chris writes:
> FAQs: A Suggested Minimal Digest Format
>...
> The intent of this FAQ is to provide current and future FAQ maintainers
> with a simple description of a minimal format for FAQs. This minimal
> format is a simplification of RFC1153 digest format...
> ...There are other more sophisticated formats that
> you can use, but this is the simplest one.

Chris's spec looks good. (I've sent him several comments
privately.) One thing which should probably be emphasized,
though, is that it (like any RFC1153-based guideline) is a
low-tech, nonextensible formalization of existing practice, and
not the be-all and end-all of powerful, general, formalized
markup.

Given the reluctance of FAQ list maintainers to jump on
standardization bandwagons whose visions they do not share
(a reluctance which I am not condemning, as I demonstrate it),
anyone promoting a stopgap solution such as RFC1153 risks flak
from people who convert to it grudgingly, only to discover a year
or two down the line that they really ought to convert to some
more sophisticated format then in vogue.

Steve Summit
scs@eskimo.com

Next message: Dave Schweisguth: "Re: First cut at minimal digest format FAQ"
Previous message: tomas@cae.wisc.edu: "REQUEST: FlameWar Digest"

[ Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive | Search Mail Archive | Authors | Usenet ]
[ 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 ]