On November 1, 2002 04:02 pm, Andreas Mohr wrote: > I agree that using a static web page for the FAQ part instead could > probably be better - but for the troubleshooting content ?? > The troubleshooting content is meant to be a step-by-step problem solver > area (and it is, to some extent). Now tell me how you'd implement the > same thing easily with an ordinary web page, without losing flexibility > for very quick changes/reordering ??
Well, for one thing, this should not be in the FAQ, but a separate troubleshooting section. Second, I *know* I don't want to see the FOM as a user. It's just bad. Beyond words! :) I don't understand why you want this very quick changes/reordering flexibility. It just seems we're trying to fix the wrong problem. We don't need a tool to help us add hundred of pages, because nobody will bother to read them. We need to think how we can present the information in a few pages. Tops. If not, we are better off spending the time fixing the problems, rather than documenting workarounds on hundreds of pages. -- Dimi.
