Re: <FAQENTRY> 3.2 update needed

JRS: In article <dkefjm0iim@news1.newsguy.com>, dated Thu, 3 Nov 2005
20:04:30, seen in news:comp.lang.javascript, Matt Kruse
<newsgroups@mattkruse.com> posted :
>Dr John Stockton wrote:
>> <snip bad code>
>> That's the sort of code that might well be put in a wiki-faq, perhaps
>> even as a replacement for something better. One cannot safely cite a
>> wiki if one wishes to cite a particular solution.
>
>If it replaces something better, then surely it will be rolled back by
>someone else who notices the bad change.

Perhaps, eventually. But, while one can expect the experts here to
review each new edition of *our* FAQ soon after it appears, one can
hardly expect them to with all relevant wiki pages continually.

>Have you used wikipedia much?
>The quantity and quality of information there is astounding, even though
>anyone can edit anything.

Most articles I find somewhat shallow - though adequate for what the
average user wants, no doubt - printed encyclopaedias are better, being
written by carefully-chosen experts rather than self-appointed ones. I
have found wiki to be in error, too.

There is or was an error in the Zeller part of de.wiki (main wiki did
not have the part where the error was), and ISTR an error about Germany
in the DST part of the main wiki - can we assume they've been corrected
by now? The true facts are elsewhere, in Risks Digest and in an obvious
place on the Web.

>If a wiki javascript faq were monitored by a number of knowledgeable people,
>bad changes would not survive.

If and only if.

>Unless you're volunteering to keep the FAQ more relevant and up-to-date, I
>don't see anyone volunteering to be the single point of contact for what has
>become a huge document.

The FAQ is not particularly large; Select All on the 2004 HTML issue
gets just under 30,000 characters. For Y2k, I maintained a UK FAQ which
ended up at just under 31,000 characters.

However, I used a simpler system, plain text, and did not allow
suggestions to build up. I put it on my Web site, uploading all changes
at next dial-up; AW kindly CRONned it from there into News early each
Sunday.

I have already suggested that Jim could amend the (presumed) Mon/Fri
CRON job to fire only on Mondays, and start a new CRON job for Fridays -
or /vice versa/. The new job would post updates to the older material,
as a plain text file comprising chunks copied from News.

That would in essence be a wiki, but with moderated update.

I write a small section and post it to News; it's copied in if Mod likes
it. You improve it; Mod likes that better, and copies it over mine. Ej
suggests a good sentence; Mod copies that in. PE posts nonsense in a
changed version; Mod ignores it. LN does a total rewrite; Mod puts that
in as a replacement.

Once a section is stable and goof, then the FAQ editor can extract it,
rephrase it convert it to XML or whatever, and drop it in the Monday
FAQ.
 

-- 
 © John Stockton, Surrey, UK.  ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk   Turnpike v4.00   IE 4 ©
 <URL:http://www.jibbering.com/faq/>  JL/RC: FAQ of news:comp.lang.javascript 
 <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/js-index.htm> jscr maths, dates, sources.
 <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> TP/BP/Delphi/jscr/&c, FAQ items, links.