 | | Re: RSS output format (was: Re: Lugnet for beginners)
|
|
(...) And, I'd assume that there would be a generic or default setting for people who want to keep it really simple, right? Ben Roller (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: RSS output format (was: Re: Lugnet for beginners)
|
|
(...) Actually, it -is- simple -- very simple -- I just gave a complicated programmergeek description, that's all. --Todd (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: RSS output format (was: Re: Lugnet for beginners)
|
|
Huh? Sounds waaay too complicated for me. I subscribe to the KISS principle. Guess I'd have to see an actual example to see if it would be useful. My $0.02 (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: RSS output format (was: Re: Lugnet for beginners)
|
|
(...) ^^^^^^^ Er, by "freebie" I mean with no or relatively no extra coding . . . --Todd (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: RSS output format (was: Re: Lugnet for beginners)
|
|
(...) Wait -- maybe instead of individual objects in the list having the flag on an object-by-object basis, maybe the lists themselves should have a list- global flag. That way, instead of each member having a single channel with some of the items (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: RSS output format (was: Re: Lugnet for beginners)
|
|
(...) Taking this RSS/Channels thing a step further, here's a related possibility which applies the RSS suggestion to a more general problem domain: First, I'd like to scrap the current Spotlight (after a one-time data conversion to a new format, (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: do we need lugnet.org.castle-world?
|
|
(...) This also helps immensely with topical cross-linkages, for example the cross-ref link to (2 URLs) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: do we need lugnet.org.castle-world?
|
|
(...) OK, splendid. (...) The .castle.org isn't necessary as a group per-se (it -could- be left empty, as .cad.dev.org is left empty above .cad.dev.org.ldraw), but it's necessary to at least exist as an intermediate level, for consistency and for (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: do we need lugnet.org.castle-world?
|
|
(...) Right on brotha;) I don't think that lugnet.castle.castleworld.admin will be around anytime soon;) I think that we MIGHT need an lugnet.castle.castle....off-topic type group, no? This way if and when something is up, we can talk about it (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.castle)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: do we need lugnet.org.castle-world?
|
|
(...) Very stable. The site has a new link, but the name is to stay. (...) I agree with having it under .castle. So how about the following (just throwing out some suggestions ...): lugnet.castle - your main group ... lugnet.castle.org - a group for (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego sources in Canada
|
|
(...) Ooh! Good idea, John. (reposted to admin.general) James (URL) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: do we need lugnet.org.castle-world?
|
|
(...) Sounds like a good idea to me. The only thing I can see as being a quibble is that once the adminstrivia(1) is over with, then it becomes a really blurred line as to what goes where. Most Castle World content will be quite happy and on topic (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.castle)
|
| |
| | Re: do we need lugnet.org.castle-world?
|
|
(...) Oops (rereading what I wrote), I didn't mean to imply that a plain .castle.org group (with no .castleworld suffix) was a no-go because of that -- I was just answering the part about the feasability of moving messages. (...) Ya, that would (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: do we need lugnet.org.castle-world?
|
|
(...) My thought was that if a while down the road, the name of Castle World was changed, and it became a problem with the newsgroup, it might not hurt to change the name of the newsgroup. Would it be possible to edit (automatically of course) all (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: 4x2ReVu: 4950 Loader Dozer
|
|
(...) Easy there Selcuk, Nan did say, "no offense, but..." Isn't this sort of question just like asking someone if they're married or what their nationality is? He (like me) just noticed the term "bf." I don't know what a BF is either. Has the world (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: do we need lugnet.org.castle-world?
|
|
(...) As far as I'm aware, it's impossible to move a body of existing NNTP messages from one newsgroup to another group without completely destroying the normal functioning of the original group. --Todd (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: do we need lugnet.org.castle-world?
|
|
(...) Well, another idea would be just lugnet.castle.org, and split it when a 2nd group comes along. As far as name stability, how hard is it to move all the messages from one group to another (other than that it may break certain references - (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: do we need lugnet.org.castle-world?
|
|
(...) Ya, that would be the idea. :) --Todd (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: do we need lugnet.org.castle-world?
|
|
(...) I third the motion... (...) It's highly unlikely to change. There is literally no danger of TLC asking us to change it since no lego reference is made, and we all agreed long ago (I think) that a simplistic name would be the best. (...) Sure, (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: do we need lugnet.org.castle-world?
|
|
(...) How stable is the name? Probably the place for something like that would be under .castle, rather than under .org, because it's Castle-focused to the core. Probably something like lugnet.castle.org.ca...leworld... --Todd (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: do we need lugnet.org.castle-world?
|
|
(...) I think I would like to second the motion if it is possible. I am very interested in Castle World and I plan on contributing but some days I am just way to busy to wade through all the Castle World admin posts and I just want to see the stuff (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | do we need lugnet.org.castle-world?
|
|
I'm wondering if we need a separate group for the administrative stuff of Castle World? I'm interested in the project, but right now don't have time to get active in it. I like seeing the creations people are making, but I'm finding it hard to keep (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | member vs. news-user (was: Re: [CW] Mutual stories question and offer)
|
|
(...) ^^^...^^^ I think you mean "news user" here, right? There haven't been any member suspensions. --Todd (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: ANNOUNCE: UK J-Box Web Site
|
|
(...) Unfortunately, at this point, assimilation (adding the jambalaya page to lugnet.loc.uk) would mean ending your contribution - which is *not* a good thing! Todd - is there a nice and easy way to let Liam maintain the UK jambalaya pages on (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Suggestion for new feature
|
|
(...) Exactly, a one-step clickie path. I couldn't have said it better. :) It's not much of a time savings, but it seems a waste to load up the entire article just to click back to the root node articlet. I know that I do it several times per day, (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Suggestion for new feature
|
|
(...) ^^^^^^^^ Wow, my first 3-character-gap dyslexic character swap! :-) I meant to say: "...but that was before the indented thread view..." --Todd (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Suggestion for new feature
|
|
(...) The original prototype for the new (May, 1999) interface did have a similar sort of feature via another symbol... Whereas the regular article is clicked up using a white and blue dot, this was a white and blue series of parallel lines... (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Suggestion for new feature
|
|
This is intended for you Todd, but I'm posting to see if other feel the same. Don't you hate it when you come to Lugnet and see a summary like "Re: This is the greatest day ever! (was: Free bricks for everyone!)" but you have no idea what the thread (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet for beginners
|
|
(...) Almost. The big difference is that when you click on a folder in the Links toolbar it pops up a submenu with all the links in it. If you click on a folder in a regular taskbar toolbar it opens an explorer window with its contents. Rob (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet for beginners
|
|
On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 04:27:44 GMT Rob Farver <rfarver@rcn.com> wrote concerning 'Re: Lugnet for beginners': (...) isn't that like saving a link on the desktop, or on the taskbar launcher? Dan (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Appropriate forum for web site design?
|
|
(...) I dunno, the fact that you put those two posts together is probably acutally a good thing! --Todd (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Appropriate forum for web site design?
|
|
(...) Ahhh...there's my goof. I was mentally mixing Brad's two posts in intent and execution. It must be the medication talking again. Must...shake...flu... (...) That was more my thought, I just made an association in my own loopy head (and, of (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Appropriate forum for web site design?
|
|
(...) Ya sure, certainly it is! -- as long as the discussion stays on-topic to the group(s). But I was answering the question more literally -- as asked. That is, if someone wanted to talk about "web site design" then there's really only one group (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: RSS output format (was: Re: Lugnet for beginners)
|
|
(...) In other words, back when the Spotlight pages were begun, it was very easy to justify trying that out, because it literally was zero programming to implement it -- it's just one particular application of the plaintext markup format I was (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | RSS output format (was: Re: Lugnet for beginners)
|
|
(...) If the Spotlight data were in an easy-to-munge format, it would be pretty straightforward, ya, but it actually grew up out of a plaintext format. Here's an example of today's page in its raw form that I edit in a browser window edit box: (URL) (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet for beginners
|
|
(...) Same functionality. Only you can also put the links bar in your taskbar (It's the Links selection under toolbars). You can also put your address bar in the taskbar. With these options, you can go to your bookmarks even if your browser isn't (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet for beginners
|
|
(...) I see. It's a lot like RDF then. Neat-o. --Todd (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet for beginners
|
|
(...) www.perl.com recently had an article on it: (URL) RSS is an XML file served by http which contains channel information; the RSS client (e.g. slashdot.org, my.netscape.com, my.yahoo.com, etc.) slurps it and spews out HTML on the end-user's (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
