On Fri, 26 Jul 1996, Tom Lane wrote:
> Joao Nunes <jd.nunes@mail.telepac.pt> writes:
> > it seems to me it would be a nice standard, at the
> > moment adopted by just a few, to post the version or date of last change
> > in the subject header.
>
> I believe this would break the archiving software at rtfm.mit.edu,
> which uses the subject field as an index key. With the date in
> there, no new copy of a FAQ would replace the old...
No, actually quite a few FAQ's (including mine) works just this way - and
it's following the recommendation of the guidelines too. It looks as
follows (with neither 'Version:' nor 'Last-modified:' used as keys AFAIK):
Subject: Hungarian broadcast information FAQ
(Version: 0.82, Last-modified: 1996/06/29)
> The existing standard is to use a Last-modified secondary header to
> carry the date of last change. Offhand I see little advantage to
> promoting the date into the subject field; it's not *that* critical
> a piece of information, and most FAQ subject lines are overly long
> already.
But then main line should be short to begin with ;-(; on the other hand
the date is important to many readers, particularly to those who get
copies via email rather than news.
- --
Zoli fekete@bc.edu, keeper of <http://www.hix.com/hungarian-faq/>
*SELLERS BEWARE: I will never buy anything from companies associated
*with inappropriate online advertising (unsolicited commercial email,
*excessive multiposting etc), and discourage others from doing so too!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQBVAwUBMfjVVsQ/4s87M5ohAQETQgH5AdOrLav17D/uE7gmK6fwoU+HSAZQHdjn
LhCXg8gz1fRiepZY/A4fCb7QNio19eG5ozPRu7BxebqumU10ygaQoA==
=AbkB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved