glenns@eas.gatech.edu (Glenn R. Stone) (04/10/91)
(Sorry for the weird selection of newsgroups.... methinks we've got the
attention of most of the people who want in on this thing anyway...)
Okay, nobody else has, so I will.
This is a formal RFD for a group in which to crosspost FAQ lists.
Now, I'm not dictatorial by nature, so I need input (after all,
isn't that what an RFD is for?) on the following issues.
o Name.
I'm not about to be responsible for running a debacle like
the ongoing you-know-what vote.... I'll not issue a CFV
until we've pretty much settled on something. I realize
this is a religious issue for people, so we'll do it this
way:
Starting as soon as this gets posted, and for a week thereafter,
I'm running a vote on the name. At the end of that week, I'll
sort things out and post results, and we'll work from there.
Since the method of determining a name is not formalized, neither
will the vote be; you may mail me your top choice only, or a
list of names, indicating priority; I will post as to which
names got the most support. Mail your name-votes to:
glenns@eas.gatech.edu (UUCP: ...gatech!eas.gatech.edu!glenns)
o Posting method.
Do we allow self-approved crossposting, or run a standard
moderated group, or leave it unmoderated? Methinks the
latter is Not A Good Thing, in that the FAQ should be discussed
in its own group, and that this group should be a "clean"
group for easy archival of FAQs.... but I'm open to discussion.
o Charter.
I don't think there will be too much discussion here, but....
"A newsgroup devoted to assembling various Frequently Asked
Question (and answer) lists (FAQ's) in one place for
ease of reference and archival."
Talk to me. Post. Flame, even, if necessary. But the demand for the
group is clear, so let's go ahead and do it ... and this time, let's
do it right.
Note that I did not include a timetable for CFV, etc. I expect this
to go on for >at least< the usual 14 days; I will not post a CFV
before March 23rd. On the other hand, the guidelines state that if
you don't have it hashed out within 30 days, you take it to mail and
start over. I hope we have something before then, but the discussion
period will end, one way or the other, on or before May 9th. The
voting, if and when it starts, will run for 21 days; the usual rules
will apply.
Here we go....
--
Glenn R. Stone
FAQ discussion to: glenns@eas.gatech.edu
Other stuff to: gs26@prism.gatech.edu
"I'm not in the book, ya'know, and I'm ding dang dong glad of it!"
-- Disney, "Winnie the Pooh" (Gopher wasn't in the Milne books)tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM (Tom Neff) (04/10/91)
In article <0rcg6j-@rpi.edu> glenns@eas.gatech.edu (Glenn R. Stone) writes: >This is a formal RFD for a group in which to crosspost FAQ lists. Since I have *JUST* posted a long attack on this idea, I won't repost, but only point to it here: | From: tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM (Tom Neff) | Newsgroups: news.admin,news.groups | Subject: Re: CFD for"comp.faq" | Message-ID: <48512763@bfmny0.BFM.COM> | Date: 9 Apr 91 10:37:18 GMT | Lines: 39
scs@adam.mit.edu (Steve Summit) (04/25/91)
[Crossposted to comp.lang.c for interest; followups to news.groups .] In article <0rcg6j-@rpi.edu> glenns@eas.gatech.edu (Glenn R. Stone) writes: >This is a formal RFD for a group in which to crosspost FAQ lists. > "A newsgroup devoted to assembling various Frequently Asked > Question (and answer) lists (FAQ's) in one place for > ease of reference and archival." > >...the demand for the group is clear, so let's go ahead and do it ... Someone is going to have to explain to me, in a little more detail, what the proposed group is supposed to accomplish and what needs it is intended to fulfill. Just saying "assembling various FAQ lists in one place for ease of reference and archival" doesn't tell me much. Who will this group serve? Who will read it, when, and why? I can't imagine sending someone with a question off to news.faq (or whatever) to find an answer. Rather than saying "Go to news.faq and read the comp.lang.c frequently-asked questions list," it's equivalent to say "Go to comp.lang.c and read the frequently-asked questions list." The proposed charter mentions "ease of archival," suggesting that the group might never be read by people, but just groveled over by archive servers. Perhaps it is intended as a place where curious readers can browse, sort of like a "Usenet Greatest Hits Album." I suppose this idea has possibilities, but consider that there are an awful lot of newsgroups, and some rather surprisingly esoteric ones have long FAQ lists, so the signal/noise ratio in even a definitively accurate FAQ group is still going to be low for any individual browser. (Splitting it up into comp.faq, rec.faq, etc. would help.) As an FAQ list maintainer myself, there are two things I haven't had an avenue for, which an FAQ newsgroup could conceivably provide: 1. A place for meta-discussions about the FAQ lists themselves. 2. A place to post "long-form" versions of the FAQ list, PostScript versions, etc. There has been remarkably little meta-discussion about the comp.lang.c FAQ list, and it has been carried out adequately by private email. Obviously an FAQ newsgroup spanning many groups couldn't accommodate meta-discussions about specific lists, particularly if the FAQ newsgroup were moderated. The need for a place to post "long-form" and PostScript versions simply reflects the fact that they are essentially source postings, which are too bulky for the associated group, but which aren't appropriate for any of the existing source newsgroups, either. Actually, mailservers and/or anonymous ftp would be fine for access to these alternate versions, and I would have set one up for the comp.lang.c FAQ list by now, except that adam.mit.edu is neither "mine" to do that sort of thing with, nor reliable enough, nor possessed of a high-bandwidth Internet connection. (Someday this will change.) Do the people who are struggling with a definition for appropriate content for the new group think that alternate versions (long form, PostScript, etc.), which are not posted to the "original" group at all, would be appropriate? All in all, I'm (obviously) pretty ambivalent about the idea of an FAQ newsgroup. If the group is formed, I won't mind crossposting the comp.lang.c FAQ list to it. But it will be very important that the existence of the group not get in my way. I'm the stubborn and individualistic sort, and I put time into editing the comp.lang.c FAQ list, the way I want to, because I want to. There must not be any suggestion that the FAQ newsgroup tell me what to do. It is obvious that FAQ lists should be crossposted to their respective groups and to any FAQ group. Therefore, the FAQ group must either be unmoderated, or jointly moderated by all the contributing FAQ list editors, or (equivalently, I suppose) I must be allowed to forge Approved: headers. I can't have my "publication schedule" dependent on some other moderator. Secondly, I have a hunch that once we've got all the FAQ lists in one neat pile, some small-minded consistency hobgoblin will suggest how nice it would be if they were all formatted the same way, too. (Glenn didn't suggest this, and I haven't seen it come up yet, but it will.) As long as human readers can effectively use the list I edit to answer their questions, I will have no interest in making cosmetic modifications just to conform to somebody's idea of a "standard style." I'm sorry this sounds harsh or defensive and a bit sarcastic or snide. It is not my intent to flame the idea of an FAQ newsgroup -- if the net collectively decides it's a good idea, that's fine. I may even find use for it myself. But, again, it is very important that it not constrain the activities of its contributors -- the FAQ list editors -- in any way. I would hate to see the proposed group "formalize" FAQ lists sufficiently that people not only take them for granted, but start insisting on certain things from them, so that I end up getting flamed at the way Rich Salz gets flamed at for not "doing my job." (No, the situations aren't completely equivalent, but there are certainly parallels.) Steve Summit scs@adam.mit.edu