| | Re: Progress so far, and a new header
|
|
(...) The more I think about it, the more I think that this is exactly what I'm oging to do. The "Reference:" header would be a fully-formed URL, while the "X-Ref:" header would tell the parser that it needs to be resolved into a LUGNET article URL. (...) (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
|
| | Re: Working sketch of FAQ item data format
|
|
(...) Among other things, yes. Upper levels can benefit too, such as bringing in 'Location' headers (1). (...) No; the way I see it, the including file has priority. Fields brought in by an include would be overridden by fields already in the (...) (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
|
| | Re: Tags
|
|
(...) True. How about H5 or H6, then? Cheers, - jsproat (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
|
| | Re: Working sketch of FAQ item data format
|
|
(...) I *think* I'm almost with ya on this... A couple more questions... Is the idea behind this so that lower levels can include headers from upper levels -- headers such as 'Topic-Level'? If so, then do the included headers override what's in the (...) (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
|
| | Re: Tags
|
|
(...) I'm a bit nervous about the <Hn> family too...but some types of answers (see the LDraw FAQ for an example) can get pretty long and do benefit from little section headers, right? --Todd (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
|
| | Re: Working sketch of FAQ item data format
|
|
(...) Here's a rough sketch: File A has these headers: Flarn: Gook Cheeseball: Snorkle Include: B Include: C File B has these headers: Flarn: Gobbledegook Slack: Snafu Snarf: Quest File C has these headers: Flarn: Vorlon Snarf: Wormy Queen: Keep (...) (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
|
| | Re: Tags
|
|
(...) I pretty much agree with Todd, except for the H3 -- I'm personally nervous to allow any H elements. As for attributes, I say allow them with the disclaimer that we will ignore them unless we're surprised otherwise. Cheers, - jsproat (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
|
| | Re: Progress so far, and a new header
|
|
(...) I was afraid of that. :-, (...) I'm prone to just go with the simpler form, copying the X-Ref header, for several reasons: a) I don't have to enter the Web interface and search for messages to find the URL, b) The URL can be automagically (...) (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
|
| | Tags
|
|
(...) That sounds like a pretty good list. Also need: - <I> and <B>, - <TT> and possibly <VAR> for things like command lines, program names, and newsgroup names, - <BR> for breaking closely-spaced runs of lines like command line sequences, - (...) (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
|
| | Re: Progress so far, and a new header
|
|
(...) Ahh, good idea. The URLs for the articles are less stable than the Xref lines are. For example, when the new web-interface/hierarchy is moved into place, shortly after that will come a remapping of all the article URLs (but the old ones will (...) (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
|
| | 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)
|