On Sun, 25 Feb 2001, David Reid wrote: > > On Sat, 24 Feb 2001, David Reid wrote: > > > > > > If we can do all this then I'll be +1 :), but presently I'm -0.5 on the > > > sample you created. > > I do have a comment about your posting. The subject line on the email that > led me to the sample was "prototype FAQ".
Sorry if that was misleading. I certainly never meant to say I was going to commit without feedback. Thanks very much for your additional comments. Unfortunately, things are getting more and more complicated. Regarding any sort of "templating" system. I certainly support this, but it seems to me that the technology for this is very much in flux, and I have no idea what is a good long-term way to implement this. In addition, I don't see any point in doing it just for the FAQ (although perhaps the FAQ could be the first thing looked at). The entire set of documentation and the entire set of web sites could use a similar system. It is a huge job even to begin a project like that, and I don't have the experience to do it well. There are "FAQ-O-Matic" type applications out there (See a FAQ related thread from last week). However, I'm not sure that we really want to replace our official FAQ with one of those. Do others disagree? At a certain point, we may need to choose a 'second best' solution here so that we can move on and do it. I'll try to comment later on with a list of all the requirements mentioned so far. Joshua.
