 | | Re: How do I format an entry in the Lugnet FAQ?
|
|
Todd: (...) Sorry. You are right. Allowed elements: P A DL DT DD UL OL LI CODE STRONG EM PRE H2 (H1 is reserved for the question) More? Which attributes? Jacob ---...--- -- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk -- -- Web...: <URL:(URL) -- ---...--- (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: Progress so far, and a new header
|
|
Jeremy: (...) No. We should use full URL's, so we can refer to data outside Lugnet too. Play well, Jacob ---...--- -- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk -- -- Web...: <URL:(URL) -- ---...--- (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: Working sketch of FAQ item data format
|
|
(...) OK, yes, that's a good way of putting it. I guess I still don't understand what you mean by the include mechanism for headers. I'll have to go back and read the threads more carefully... (...) Maybe; but it wouldn't allow specialized (...) (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: Working sketch of FAQ item data format
|
|
(...) What you're talking about sounds more like an inherited directory filter than a header exclude. Hmmm, could this be solved by placing a token file at strategic spots in the directory structure? Cheers, - jsproat (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: Progress so far, and a new header
|
|
(...) Thanks guys. You realize, this would keep me away from my SW legos... :-P Would the "Xref:" header embedded into the LUGNET nntp messages work for a reference? e.g.: Xref: lugnet.com lugnet.faq:186 in the nntp message translates into: (...) (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: Working sketch of FAQ item data format
|
|
(...) Oh, it was just a thought. I kind of like the simplicity of the robots.txt format. You include and exclude things, and each layer modifies previous layers. Kind of also like the way Unix directory permissions work. One example purpose that an (...) (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: How do I format an entry in the Lugnet FAQ?
|
|
(...) Eeek -- not 4.0 -- probably not even 3.2 -- way unnecessarily complicated. IMO, no DTD, no nothing except a very restricted subset of HTML is really all that is necessary. The markup is only there at all (instead of pure plain-text) because (...) (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: Progress so far, and a new header
|
|
(...) Me too. --Todd (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: New LUGNET directory structre?
|
|
(...) And again. I've re-arranged the FAQ items into Todd's directory structure. There are no new items from last update. A lot of the items I just threw into a dir because I couldn't find a good home for them. And a lot of items need answers... :-P (...) (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: New LUGNET directory structre?
|
|
(...) Not sure yet...only started seriously thinking about and planning for translation a couple months ago. (...) It couldn't hurt, but I wouldn't say that the wording is stabilized enough to be worth investing much time in this early on. (...) (...) (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
