Subject:
|
Re: Working sketch of FAQ item data format
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.faq
|
Date:
|
Fri, 7 May 1999 15:50:08 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
jsproat@%NoMoreSpam%geocities.com
|
Viewed:
|
1860 times
|
| |
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote:
> I guess I still don't understand
> what you mean by the include mechanism for headers.
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 Yourself Alive
During processing, File A will then effectively have these headers:
Flarn: Gook (From File A)
Cheeseball: Snorkle (From File A)
Slack: Snafu (From File B)
Snarf: Quest (From File B)
Queen: Keep Yourself Alive (From File C)
The Flarn header wasn't pulled in from File B, because it was already
defined in File A. Similarly, the Snarf header was pulled from File B, so
it was not fetched again from File C. By changing the order of the Include
headers, you can set preference for one file's headers over the other's.
> > Hmmm, could this be solved by placing a token file
> > at strategic spots in the directory structure?
> Maybe; but it wouldn't allow specialized collections/packagings of arbitrary
> subtrees, would it?
No, but setting up custom index files would.
e.g. magic file Foo.Index might have the following lines:
A
B
C
...the FAQ produced from this file would have, in sequence, the FAQ items
from File A, File B, and File C. We could probably increase or decrease
confusion by using yet another header "Sub-FAQ:", which means "I'm not
pulling the headers of this sub-file, but rather printing it and moving on
to the next header". Such a header would probably only make sense in an
index file.
How about some heirarichal representation like:
Sub-FAQ: /thisdir/A
Sub-Section: Some Random TItle
Sub-FAQ: /thatdir/B
Sub-FAQ: /thatdir/overthere/C
End-Sub-Section:
Which would be simple to parse into HTML and text.
Of course, all this is doing, is overriding the LUGNET directory structure
-- which I would prefer for the main FAQ structure. The index file solution
would only really be viable for specialized FAQs, such as a newbie FAQ or
some such.
Cheers,
- jsproat
--
Jeremy H. Sproat <jsproat@geocities.com>
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Horizon/5249/
"I prefer the term para-mental. It keeps me out of the loony bin."
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | 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)
|
20 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
|
|
|
|
