Yes I do!
When I still used NN, I used the digest functionality as a way of
browsing FAQs. I'd split the FAQ, then pick out the bits I wanted to
read.
I moved to strn, because NN development seemed to have ceased. I've
noticed that I now read fewer FAQs.
>The basic changes are that I added the RFC1153-like hyphen line, and
>allowed additional RFC-822 headers, and header continuation mechanisms.
Yes, but why not actually make it compliant with RFC 1153?
>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 that is sufficient
>to be compatible with common newsreader digest handling functionality,
>current practise, and Thomas Fine's "FAQ digest format to HTML" converter
>which allows more sophisticated viewing on HTML-aware systems such
>as Mosaic or WWW.
But I question whether all of the changes you've made *are* actually
"simplification".
For instance, why did you get rid of the blank line after the line of
hyphens? That stops your standard being compatible with RFC1153, and
I can't think of any advantage it gives you. It looks to me like
change for the sake of change.
mathew
-- I have a flawless philosophical and scientific model of reality. Unfortunately, it's actual size. We must never be dogmatic. Anyone who says otherwise is wrong. Will betray country for food.
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved