Nancy reminded me that I also posted some comments on URL:
headers to the faqbook list, without also mentioning them here,
where they're just as germane. She had written, there:
> One problem with "URL" is that it's too generic. I'd rather make it
> clear that it's a URL for the FAQ and use something like "FAQ-URL" or
> "FAQ-Location". That way it will be easy to add other URLs in the
> future e.g., "Related-URL" or "Maintainer-URL" or whatever.
[and I said:]
We've been round and round on this one, and I don't remember a
consensus emerging. My feeling is that so many good ideas
emerged that it was clearly too complicated an issue to encode
completely yet simply and naturally in headers.
Just the other day I realized, therefore, that the right thing to
use might be a single, generic header after all, and if there are
73 things you'd like to point at, to put pointers to all of them
(suitably annotated, of course) in the one page that the generic
header points at.
[Obviously, this works for links that *people* would want to
chase, but not nearly as well for links that automatic tools
want to pick up.]
Steve Summit
scs@eskimo.com
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved