 | | Re: Progress so far, and a new header
|
|
(...) Not to be anal-retentive, but you've forgotton the colons. Um, I'm not sure a pun was intended there. :-P Also, we should probably start keeping track of headers which may repeat, and those which are optional. Otherwise, it amtches my list. (...) (26 years ago, 29-Apr-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: Progress so far, and a new header
|
|
Jeremy: (...) Both the "Originator" and the "Comment" header entries make sense. Play well, Jacob ---...--- -- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk -- -- Web...: <URL:(URL) -- ---...--- Here's the edited list of header entries (please verify that I haven't (...) (26 years ago, 29-Apr-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: Raw FAQ data format (Was: Format of FAQ items)
|
|
Jeremy: (...) I didn't think so. What I tried to explain was how the processing tools would see the file _after_ the "Include" header had been processed. (...) ~~~...~~~ This is the critical part. I hadn't noticed it earlier. (...) Yes. Play well, (...) (26 years ago, 29-Apr-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: Who's who in Legoland
|
|
(...) IMO: Embed links to webpages or directly to images via the <A> tag, but don't embed images with the <IMG> tag -- that's getting too carried away. Any collection of images worth linking to (for example, sets or minifig or parts imges) should be (...) (26 years ago, 29-Apr-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: Who's who in Legoland
|
|
(...) might (...) Why not just have two versions of the FAQ? One with images, one without. The content would virtually be the same(1). Jeff 1 - Just a short caption by images would suffice, I think. (26 years ago, 28-Apr-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
