[Wrapping up old issues...] On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Is it asking to much to insist people know > > what an "HTTP status code" is before they read the docs? > > I don't feel you are actually doing this - all you do is > preparing the user that _if_ he/she continues reading the > Apache manual without this prerequisit they _may_ experience > problems because of these terms that _may_ be used in certain > areas of the Apache configuration (but not in all - you may > want to make _that_ a little more obvious).
Will do. > > <p>This document describes the basic purpose of this manual, > > the assumptions behind it, and provides some links to useful > > supplementary material.</p> > > What about some link to the RFC 2616 at this point? > (Maybe you already cover this by the Apache internal links > - I didn't check that.) The "project library" should have all the relevant links (although it is a little out-dated right now; any volunteers to freshen it up?). > > <li>The manual includes a <a href="glossary.html">glossary</a> that > > defines many of the terms we use.</li> > > In how far can you encourage the reader that he/she will > find hyperlinks to this glossary in documents that use > terms described there? > Do I need to _read_ the glossary, or will I be linked to > it 'when appropriate'? (Each glossary term has a link > target, so it _can_ be used this way.) Your document is > meant to build up some expectation for the reader, and > this aspect would be one that encourages me to read on. Having auto-links-to-glossary is an idea in the STATUS file, but has not yet been implimented. > (By the way: these glossary targets are used like > "<dt><a name="accesscontrol">Access Control</a></dt>", > thus they display a hovering effect when you move the > mouse over them, as if they were links. > Using > "<dt><a name="accesscontrol"></a>Access Control</dt>" > would be the way to avoid this effect, which might mislead > the reader who currently expects this to be clickable.) I don't understand why browsers do that. If there is no HREF, then they shouldn't pretend it is a link. The empty <a></a> could work, but I consider that semantically ugly. Thanks for your comments. Joshua. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
