3 Apr
2000
3 Apr
'00
2:52 p.m.
On Mon, 3 Apr 2000 allisonp(a)world.std.com wrote:
<disjointed ramblings>
I think there are a couple things that are needed. One is a site that holds
and or provides pointers to the FAQ's, the other is some serious FAQ
writing/updating. The perfect example is the MicroVAX FAQ. It's *so* out
of date in some parts that it isn't funny. While some things just need
found and or updated, others really should be written up.
Is there any site out there that you can go to select the manufacturer/type
computer you're interested in, and then have it point you were you want to
go?
For example, I go to this hypothetical site, and select Apple ][ and it
points me to the various Apple ][ FAQ's and other sources of info. Then I
select PDP-8's and it sends me to the PDP-8 FAQ and sites with info on the
PDP-8.
I guess what I'm saying is we need a sort of manually done Yahoo for classic
computer info. A lot of the info is out there, but finding it can be a
nightmare! FAQ's should be collected and kept locally on the site.
This is some of what I was trying to do with my web site, but I never seem
to find time to work on it.
Probably the way to do it would be to publish a layout boilerplate, and then
have different people take different platforms and put together the info on
where to find the info. Then have other people look over that and see if
they know of additional info.
</disjointed ramblings>
Zane
On 3 Apr 2000, Eric Smith wrote:
What is needed s a clear concise floppy FAQ! It would put all this to bed
once and for all and insure the knowledgebase stays intact.
Allison
I've been wondering about this, actually. Wasn't there talk of putting a
FAQ together a couple of years ago? Was anything ever done on it?
I'd be happy to help compile/edit a faq for the list, if anyone else is
interested in tackling this.
It just seems that the same questions (and arguments) have been popping up
every few months for years. Anyone who's interested in doing this, go
ahead and email me privately.
Cheers,
Aaron
Given the
recent floppy thread what we need are summaries, not archives.
Since no one is going to write summaries, and even if someone did, they
probably wouldn't have enough detail to be good for searching, I have to
disagree. We do need archives.