FAQ Noise

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • dhtml

    #16
    Re: FAQ Noise

    Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
    dhtml wrote:
    >Dr J R Stockton wrote:
    >>On Oct 6, 12:10 am, dhtml <dhtmlkitc...@g mail.comwrote:
    >>>Dr J R Stockton wrote:
    That is obviously an invalid ID, and it is not backwards-compatible. Use
    instead
    >
    That was already pointed out by JR Stockton. Thank you.
    <h2><a name="getWindow Size" id="getWindowSi ze"
    >How do I find the size of the window?</a></h2>
    >
    That could work if changed to be <a name="FAQ5_7" and id="getWindowSi ze">...


    Or perhaps:

    <h3 id="getWindowSi ze"><a name="FAQ5_7">. ..
    (Shouldn't you know the basics before you attempt to improve something?
    One really wonders how you of all applicants could get this job.)
    >
    Of course I should know the basics.

    This is off-topic, but worth saying anyway:

    If you wonder why you did not get to be FAQ maintainer, then re-read the
    thread where you volunteered. The above quoted text that you wrote (the
    one I am replying to now, in this paragraph) is the type of thing that
    make others dislike you. I can tell you it comes off as pretty dang rude
    and condescending. This is fairly typical behavior of yours. If you want
    to be FAQ maintainer (and I believe you are technically qualified
    enough), then adjusting your attitude might help.

    Garrett
    >
    PointedEars

    Comment

    • dhtml

      #17
      Re: FAQ Noise

      Henry wrote:
      On Oct 6, 5:59 pm, dhtml wrote:
      <snip>
      >It would be even better if the IDs were not numbered but more
      >semantic, e.g.
      >>
      ><h2 id='#getWindowS ize'>How do I find the size of the window?</h2>
      ^??
      >That would require changes to the scripts and the XML.
      >
      Remember that the archives are full of references to the FAQ using
      those existing fragment identifiers, which should not rendered broken
      by changes.
      So the way it is now, the fragment might be broken; the user might have
      to search using the "find" feature.

      If I create a new file "faq.html" and restore the old "index.html ".
      This preserves links w/fragment identifiers in the archives.

      However, all the links to "jibbering. com/faq/" will return the old
      "index.html " page, not the new "faq.html".

      A rewrite rule could be used to map any http request with "#FAQ" to the
      old page, as "index_09_2008. html", which would include a link at the top
      of that page to the current "/faq/". The current page would then have to
      eliminate all the links to "#FAQ". Then, anyone searching the archives
      who got a link to an old FAQ section would still be able to get the
      information provided by that link.

      I don't have access to creating any sort of rewrite rule on that server.
      If it can't be done on the server, it could be done in javascript.

      Garrett

      Comment

      Working...