>The feeling seems to be that Usenet FAQs are the only "real" FAQs, and
>Web "FAQs," -- especially if they are designed to help sell a product --
>aren't really FAQs because any altruistic intent is of secondary
>importance at best.
It depends on how the FAQ is presented. For example, Kodak is exactly the
right entity to answer questions about Kodak products. But if the FAQ is
presented as a Photographic Technology FAQ, and only Kodak products are
mentioned, then we have a lot to be cynical about.
(Note: This example is hypothetical; I haven't seen the Kodak FAQ.)
I think there was some discussion a while back about trademarking "FAQ".
I don't remember if it was ever resolved whether this is a Good Idea, but
even if it is, it probably isn't workable. Terry may correct me if I'm
wrong, but trademarks, unlike copyrights, must be defended to be kept, and
we hardly have the resources to defend it against even infrequent
challenges.
-- Matt Messina messina@umich.edu