 | | Re: Tags
|
|
(...) Heh heh. Well, <H4> is typically the same size as the base font, but in bold, so I don't think anything but <H3> is needed, if that even is. Alternatives to <H3>x</H3> might be <P><B>x</B></P> or [maybe] better yet <P CLASS=y><B>x</B></P>...? (...) (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
