httpd-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "David Reid" <>
Subject Re: What should the FAQ contain? (was Re: Proposal: Trash the 2.0 FAQ.)
Date Wed, 21 Feb 2001 19:44:30 GMT
> However, I would like to see some opinions on the question raised by Bill
> on what criteria should be used for including things in the FAQ.

Wasn't it OtherBill?  Too many bills :)

> Summary (please correct me if I'm not being fair):
> Option 1:
> - Include only "Showstopper" FAQs which prevent people from using Apache.
> I believe this would mean that the FAQ would contain a few of the
> questions in the current categories C and D and nothing else.  New
> documents could be created for "Background information" (Part A), and
> other information could be moved to more appropriate places in the docs.

I would have thought more of a layered FAQ, with showstoppers being the
first and most obvious layer, with links to more detailled and therefore
specific areas beneath.  I agree with OtherBill that we should try and have
the biggest issues in the top level as there is nothing I hate worse than
scrolling through page after page of FAQ to find what I want to get
soemthing built/running.  Once it's built/running then it's not as important
if it takes longer to refine it's operation...

> Option 2:
> - Include questions which are "frequently asked" in the newsgroups, bug
> database, or the addresses.  Include these things in the
> FAQ only if they cannot be adequately addressed elsewhere, either because
> they don't fit in any other documents, or they need to be repeated for
> added emphasis.

Yes, these are good things to have, but they should be "in context" and not
just thrown into an FAQ.  The "apache web server FAQ" should be
showstoppers, the "apache web server configuration FAQ" should be about
configuring and so on.  Keep it relevant.

> My personal opinion is that, while "showstoppers" should be given
> priority, Option 1 is too restrictive.

Duh?  Why is it restrictive?  I didn't see anything in OB's response that
implied only ever have one FAQ.  Perhaps something like having a main page
with the showstoppers and then a set of sub sections dealing with specific
areas which can have more detail.


View raw message