[ZDP] Digicool's Q & A

Christopher Petrilli petrilli@amber.org
Tue, 9 Mar 1999 10:55:08 -0500

On Tue, Mar 09, 1999 at 01:04:53PM +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> > I propose that the FAQ be structured by "package", similar to the way
> > I've structured it in the Q&A.  This will allow the FAQ to easily add
> > sections (and turn the maintenance over to others) for packages such as
> > MySQLDA, PostgresDA, TinyTables, Confera, etc.
> Hm, while this is mainly a good idea, some of the FAQ sections that have
> been emerging here don't seem to match them entirely. Most prominently,
> there seem to be emerging an 'External Methods' and a 'DTML' section.  

This isn't a problem... Is there any reason you can't consider "External
Methods" and "DTML" their own "packages?"  I mean, they're really part
of packages already (EM is built-in package, and DTML is part of OFS I
think).  So seems reasonable :-)

> Does anybody have any opinions on how to post the FAQ sections to the
> list? I'm starting to break the FAQ into sections. Would it be
> preferable if I posted these in one large document, or several smaller
> ones? I'm tending towards the latter, as I'm breaking them up into
> separate files anyway, now.

Honestly, since this is a web development system, why post it to the
list?  Why not make a quick table of contents and post that to the list,
with pointers to the location of the real thing?  Save some bandwidth.

> Perhaps when the ZDP website is up (especially with somekind of FAQ tool
> on it) only a reminder of the FAQ is enough for posting; right now I'll
> keep using the list to keep momentum.

| Christopher Petrilli                      ``Television is bubble-gum for
| petrilli@amber.org                          the mind.''-Frank Lloyd Wright