> Steve Summit <scs@eskimo.com> wrote:
>
> > 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.
[... snipped ...]
> I like this idea, a lot.It's the most flexible, the most easily
> adapted to differing needs.I might support two "standard" headers,
> something like "FAQ-URL:" and "Maintainer-URL:", but five or six is
> getting a bit out of hand.
>
> Granted, this would make it more difficult for automatic tools to
> collect different sorts of URLs.I'm not sure just what the solution
> is there; but as a separate but related point, I'll mention that at
> least a worm wouldn't have any trouble with the added level.
You may define a standard format for the page at which the generic header
points. Then automatic tools will find it easy to collect whatever
information they need. To facilitate usage of the standard format, make
a template easily available for people who want to construct FAQs. You
may also want to develop a CGI script and a form for people to fill in
and then the script would automatically build the standard page and store
it in your WWW site (or in FAQ maintainer's WWW site if he/she so prefers).
--- Omer
Internet: xlacha1@wizard.weizmann.ac.il
WWW home page: http://www.weizmann.ac.il/~xlacha1/
"I am Cochlear Corporation of the Borg. All resistance is futile.
Deaf Culture is irrelevant. You shall be implanted."
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved