Subject:
|
Re: Raw FAQ data format (Was: Format of FAQ items)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.faq
|
Date:
|
Tue, 27 Apr 1999 07:20:12 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1749 times
|
| |
|
|
Sproaticus:
> > We could also reuse "Revision" for translations.
>
> You mean like,
>
> Revision: Todd Lehman, 19971224, en
> Revision: Minx Kelly, 19980921
> Revision: Jacob Sparre Andersen, 19990221, da
>
> or some such?
No, like:
Revision: Todd Lehman, 1997-12-24
Revision: Minx Kelly, 1998-09-21
Translated-From: en
-> Revision: Jacob Sparre Andersen, 1999-02-21 <-
Content-Language: da
> More easily read by humans, probably just as easy to parse. What would a
> time-of-day stamp look like?
Can't remember. I think you append
"-"
Hours (two digits)
"." (or is it ":")
Minutes (two digits)
> > > Plus:
> > > Include: [applies the headers of the included file]
> > Which of the header entries?
>
> Any and all, probably. Included headers could then be overridden by the
> includer.
All entries means that you claim that the including file was
revised every time the included file was revised.
Not good!
> > > > - ASCII + HTML entities are allowed in the headers.
> > > At least the ® -style chars. I don't see much need
> > > for more HTML in the headers.
> > That is what you call HTML entities.
> > Todd seems to want Latin-1 + HTML entities. That's fine for me.
>
> Arg. My bad.
>
> Anyway, I prefer typing "®" over "(hold down ALT key)0174(release ALT
> key)". The mnemonics are *much* easier to remember. Do you have any
> preferred way of escaping hard-to-type characters?
I prefer to use [Compose],[o],[r] - much faster.
Typing and storage encoding doesn't have to be the same
anyway.
Play well,
Jacob
------------------------------------------------------------
-- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk --
-- Web...: <URL:http://hugin.risoe.dk/JJ_Memorial/FAQ/> --
------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Raw FAQ data format (Was: Format of FAQ items)
|
| (...) Since header order is important, this should work pretty well. (...) Not bad either. Wouldn't changing an included file imply that the including file has also changed? (...) ^^^...^^^ Huh? (...) But then we'd have to run the thing through a (...) (25 years ago, 27-Apr-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Raw FAQ data format (Was: Format of FAQ items)
|
| (...) Looks good to me. (...) You mean like, Revision: Todd Lehman, 19971224, en Revision: Minx Kelly, 19980921 Revision: Jacob Sparre Andersen, 19990221, da or some such? (...) More easily read by humans, probably just as easy to parse. What would (...) (25 years ago, 26-Apr-99, to lugnet.faq)
|
82 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
