Peter Seibel: > Just to be clear, this discussion, although taking place on the cl- > faq list had veered off to discuss the common-lisp directory project
Is this issue still general enough, or maybe we should move to the common-lisp-directory list? [from a message to the cl-faq list] Jean-François Brouillet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If we end-up with hundred's of links that just point elsewhere, > that's only half as useful as if those links are accompanied > by a short summary paragraph. [...] > Yes, that is a lot of editorial work, but that's the price to pay if > we don't want to get YAMLL (Yet Another Mindless List of Links.) Absolutely. The CLD editing form for such entries has both a "Description/Abstract" and "HTML description (long)" fields besides "Title". Part of the contributor activities: Package and Resource Directory http://wiki.alu.org/Package_and_Resource_Directory will involve updating existing entries, possibly adding summaries when they are unavailable or expanding short ones. Additional information may be added via notes and comments (e.g. short reviews, lists of errata, etc.). In such summaries, it is probably better to summarize/paraphrase and keep quotes (enclosed in quote marks) short whenever possible. > BTW: even though Peter Seibel has editorial control, we should prevent > him from making the PCL entries :-) I created the PCL entry myself :) But, in general, self-submissions are OK because they usually provide better accuracy. Paolo -- Lisp Propulsion Laboratory log - http://www.paoloamoroso.it/log _______________________________________________ Gardeners mailing list [email protected] http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners
