Re[2]: Ohio State HTML FAQ archive is down

Sheerin, Peter (psheerin@mfi.com)
Thu, 06 Jul 95 18:01:19 PST

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Sheerin, Peter: "Re[2]: Ohio State HTML FAQ archive is down"
Previous message: John Lock: "Re: Ohio State HTML FAQ's"

Hmmm. I agree that OSU's site is better for the digest format
(although I've designed my FAQ with his special format in mind,
instead), but what do you like better about the other sites for
plain-text FAQs? Do they pick up on links (other than rfc's) better?
Do they have better indexes or search tools?

I think it's high time that we had 1-to-several suggested FAQ formats,
whether as an official RFC, something shepherded by rtfm.mit.edu or
the *.answers group, or just by the collective group of these list
subscribers.

For someone to create a new FAQ that hasn't done it before is
confusing. (I can speak from recent experience.) What format is
standard? Oh, there are no real standards? Which of the de-facto ones
do I choose? Which newsreaders can navigate through which of these
de-facto standards? How do I convert from HTML to text or vice-versa?

The lack of standards (even suggested ones) makes it difficult for
maintainers and readers alike. Particularly as the Internet expands, I
think our goal needs to be to make FAQs as easy-to-use and accessable
as possible for newcomers.

This means (IMHO) some sort of cohesive standard(s).

I really like Tom Fine's Web FAQ structure, though it could use some
enhancements (more navigational links, the completion of his
wishlist).

But someone from O'Riely a while back had seemingly started along some
sort of path like this, but I've never heard anything else. If he's
still working on it, that could be the glue that's needed to begin to
standardize things.

With some standards in place, the latest generation of News Readers,
and perhaps web browsers, could adopt common FAQ interface standards
that made life easier on the maintainer and the reader alike.

Even little things help, like defining a standard representation of
URLs (actually, I think one exsists, but I keep seeing people use
other standards....), or a table-of-contents format. Or making the
keywords header mandatory...

No, not every FAQ will change overnight, but given a clear standard,
and a compelling set of benefits, the most-used ones will change.

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Ohio State HTML FAQ archive is down
Author: Nancy McGough <nancym@ii.com> at Internet
Date: 7/6/95 5:45 PM

I still like the Ohio archive for accessing FAQs that are in
digest format. Also, it's nice that it puts in links to RFCs.
But for most, maybe 90%, of the FAQs, Oxford, Cambridge, Utrecht,
etc. are better.

Nancy

Next message: Sheerin, Peter: "Re[2]: Ohio State HTML FAQ archive is down"
Previous message: John Lock: "Re: Ohio State HTML FAQ's"

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