comp.lang.javascript FAQ question

Discussion in 'Javascript' started by VK, Jul 31, 2006.

  1. VK

    VK Guest

    As I'm still in Europe with rather occasional Internet access, I
    originally missed a few weeks old discussion about FAQ posting and
    update.
    While making my program for automated FAQ posting, I've made some
    research on the FAQ question. That time the program was not used by the
    FAQ poster, but I kept the article on my laptop. I see the moment now
    to post it.

    -------------

    As it is (or isn't) known, Big Seven's Usenet groups do not have
    *official* FAQ or sites or links. The only official parts are
    Rationale, Charter and Short Description. These parts are formed before
    voting and stored (if passed) in <news.announce.newgroups> archives for
    public references.

    It is also a rule that the above mentioned documents (Rationale,
    Charter, Short Description) are made on the "Once in - Never out"
    principles. Once passed the voting and approved they never can be
    changed: a new newsgroup must be created instead if needed. This is the
    rule of the classic Usenet (at least): groups are not "updating" with
    time. They are appearing and disappearing (if no activity) based on the
    current demand.

    In this concern comp.lang.javascript exists with more than 10 years old
    charter and still fully within of it and it doesn't lack posting
    activity :) My sincere congratulations.

    Any other resources related to a newsgroup - including FAQ - are
    subjects of the public consensus and the newsgroup's traditions. For
    older newsgroup traditions possibly have even more weight than some "up
    to time consensus". It means that legally anyone can start posting
    something called "official FAQ", but in application to clj it would be
    a bogus to be killfiled.

    The creation of comp.lang.javascript had been initialized by Thomas
    Winzig in December of 1995. The standard voting process has been
    conducted in January 1996. By the majority of votes the new group was
    approved January 27 1996
    A side note: on January 27 of each year it could a "birthday posting"
    :)
    All results of the voting process are stored at
    <news.announce.newgroups> It can be viewed say at
    <http://groups.google.com/group/news.announce.newgroups/browse_frm/thread/e472637f7141a60d/1cfd3fc1b03fd982>

    Right after the creation the newsgroup did not have any explicit
    leader. AFAICT the main and only purpose of Thomas Winzig was to get
    rid of JavaScript questions in Java-related newsgroups. He did not
    participate much in clj any after.

    In April of 1996 Gordon McComb created a page called "unofficial FAQ"
    and he started to provide links to it in his posts. Unfortunately this
    page located at <http://www.freqgrafx.com/411/jsfaq.html> was not
    preserved.

    In the end of May of 1996 Erica L. Sadun created a document called "The
    JavaScript FAQlet" using her own experience and partially materials of
    Gordon McComb. She started to post "The JavaScript FAQlet" in clj
    rather regularly but without any fixed schedule. The original version
    can be viewed at
    <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/browse_frm/thread/e1f1d331269e6cc6/5c0e0aa2b389ef24?lnk=st&q=&rnum=1&hl=en#5c0e0aa2b389ef24>

    By the end of summer of 1996 Erica stopped her postings and then
    Michael Moncur created the revised version called "comp.lang.javascript
    Mini-FAQ". He started to post this document weekly by Saturdays.

    April 1998 Christopher Thompson restored the regularity of postings. He
    created fully revisited version called "comp.lang.javascript meta-FAQ".
    The current clj FAQ (after eight major updates) still keeps the
    structure of Thomson's document. The original beta version can be
    viewed at
    <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/browse_frm/thread/9214118f167e8800/50ff3fd5ae5c532a?lnk=st&q=&rnum=1&hl=en#50ff3fd5ae5c532a>

    February 1999 Thompson asked for volunteers to take over the FAQ
    posting and maintenance. Jim Ley called for this, he also donated space
    on jibbering.com for FAQ storage. The first FAQ post under the name of
    Jim Ley was made October of 1999. Since November of 1999 the FAQ posted
    with sender name "comp.lang.javascript FAQ" (no more individual names).

    January 2004 Jim Ley asked for volunteers to take over the FAQ
    maintenance. Richard Cornford called for this. March 2004 Richard
    Cornford released next major update #8. The current FAQ version is 8.1,
    so there were not any major updates for 2.5 years by now.


    Prieure de comp.lang.javascript FAQ (to Dan Brown with all my
    disrespect :)

    Gordon McComb | Apr 1996 - June 1996 | "unofficial FAQ"
    Erica L. Sadun | June 1996 - Aug 1996 | "The JavaScript FAQlet"
    Michael Moncur | Aug 1996 - Mar 1998 | "comp.lang.javascript Mini-FAQ"
    Christopher Thompson | Apr 1998 - Feb 1999 | "comp.lang.javascript
    meta-FAQ"
    Jim Ley | Feb 1999 - Jan 2004 | "comp.lang.javascript META-FAQ"
    Richard Cornford | Jan 2004 - now | "comp.lang.javascript FAQ"


    >From this rather long preface it should be clear that only Richard

    Cornford has moral rights to maintain FAQ or to transfer this duty to
    someone else. Jim Ley (despite still active participant of clj) should
    stay with his decision of Jan 2004 and avoid putting any pressure.

    At the same time I would like to remind to Mr.Cornford that his duty is
    to be a FAQ *maintainer* and not a *FAQ archives keeper*. The Internet
    does the latter automatically without any extra help.

    The best way IMHO to move the FAQ out of the current stagnation:

    The whole procedure of adding/updating/removing FAQENTRY's has to be
    much stricter defined and narrowed. It is not good enough that 1-2-3
    people - however "oldposting" and knowlegeable they are - are saying
    "it is not a FAQ" or "it is wrong".
    That must be a well-defined amount of similar questions within a month
    that makes it to be a FAQ. It is completely *out* of the public
    interest what does the current FAQ maintainer think of such question:
    is it a "good question" or she would rather kill whoever is asking it.
    It is irrelevant. She is only in power to decide where to add the new
    FAQENTRY and what other FAQENTRY to remove if needed to keep the FAQ
    list compact.

    After a new FAQENTRY is defined it must be a public discussion for the
    best answer to the question. This discussion i) should not take forever
    and ii) must be the best *practical* answer to a practical question.
    Evangelistic narrations of type "don't use it", "don't do it", "it's
    useless" etc must be kept exclusively for private posts and blogs.

    Until this ussue is not solved, the frequency and the mechanics of the
    FAQ posting is not really so important.
    VK, Jul 31, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. VK wrote:
    > As I'm still in Europe with rather occasional Internet access, ...

    <snip>

    The greatly reduced irrelevant noise originating from you has been
    appreciated. It is a pity that you cannot keep it that way.

    You opinions remain, as always, worthless.

    Richard.
    Richard Cornford, Jul 31, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. VK

    VK Guest

    Richard Cornford wrote:
    > The greatly reduced irrelevant noise originating from you has been
    > appreciated. It is a pity that you cannot keep it that way.
    >
    > You opinions remain, as always, worthless.


    I have shown to everyone (who's interested to read) the history and
    traditions of the FAQ posting in clj. It also explains why someone
    Richard Cornford is currently on charge of the group FAQ and why his
    position and opinion must be respected.

    At the same time Mr.Cornford is not the group's creator nor the
    original FAQ editor/poster. He is just the last in the long chain
    started back in 1996. Thusly if Mr.Cornford is in a private opinion
    that back in March 2004 he managed to create some "ultimate final all
    times FAQ version" which doesn't need any major upgrades anymore - if
    he really thinks so then he is sorry mistaken. It is a sorry mistake
    even if some other people (including ones participated in the March
    2004 edition) may share the same opinion.

    The FAQ has to become FAQ once again, not an historical document. That
    was the 4th attempt to change a damn line in the book over the last
    year (no one was initialized by myself). Every single time it shutes
    down slowly but surely by the current FAQ's maintainer. I don't know
    for how long is he hoping to *keep* rather than *maintain* the FAQ, but
    the time limit may be shorter than he thinks it is. Usenet is not an
    absolute monarchy nor a hunta. It is closer to the democratic
    institutions - closer than Mr.Cornford possibly thinks.

    "The FAQ, its wording and revisions, are open to public scrutiny and
    comment in
    this forum and the results are by mutual consent (albeit passive
    consent
    in most cases)."
    Richard Cornford
    July 2, 2003
    VK, Jul 31, 2006
    #3
  4. VK wrote:

    > [...]
    > While making my program for automated FAQ posting, I've made some
    > research on the FAQ question. That time the program was not used by the
    > FAQ poster, but I kept the article on my laptop. I see the moment now
    > to post it.


    I wasn't aware that somebody else besides me was working on automated
    FAQ postings. Didn't mean to pick the salt from your potatoes.

    > [ ... skip FAQ history ... ]


    Why not making a FAQ entry of that :) "What is the history of the
    comp.lang.javascript FAQ ?"

    > The best way IMHO to move the FAQ out of the current stagnation:
    >
    > The whole procedure of adding/updating/removing FAQENTRY's has to be
    > much stricter defined and narrowed. It is not good enough that 1-2-3
    > people - however "oldposting" and knowlegeable they are - are saying
    > "it is not a FAQ" or "it is wrong".


    Well, I'ld say that depends on the criteria that are used to make such
    a decision, not so much on the number of persons.

    > That must be a well-defined amount of similar questions within a month
    > that makes it to be a FAQ. It is completely *out* of the public
    > interest what does the current FAQ maintainer think of such question:
    > is it a "good question" or she would rather kill whoever is asking it.
    > It is irrelevant. She is only in power to decide where to add the new
    > FAQENTRY and what other FAQENTRY to remove if needed to keep the FAQ
    > list compact.
    >
    > After a new FAQENTRY is defined it must be a public discussion for the
    > best answer to the question.


    True, but I'm also convinced that many of such public discussions
    already took place in the past, but without making it to the FAQ. Why
    not browse the archives and extract useful information from it ?

    The same could apply to existing code from various resources -
    thoroughly reviewed, adapted where necessary and added to the FAQ. The
    questions are as important as the answers; they should cover frequent,
    practical topics and offer qualitative responses. I'ld look at the FAQ
    as a library of (mostly) ready-to-go solutions for common problems.

    I think the FAQ should just have more content, I'm imagining things
    like
    - How do I find yesterday's date ?
    - How to know the Unicode code point of a character ?
    - How many dimensions can variables have in javascript ?
    - Can I store files using javascript ?
    etc. etc.

    > This discussion i) should not take forever
    > and ii) must be the best *practical* answer to a practical question.


    Totally right, IMHO!

    --
    Bart
    Bart Van der Donck, Jul 31, 2006
    #4
  5. VK

    VK Guest

    Bart Van der Donck wrote:
    > I wasn't aware that somebody else besides me was working on automated
    > FAQ postings. Didn't mean to pick the salt from your potatoes.


    Never mind at all :)
    Everyone (I'm sure) appreciate your efforts. You also may take a look
    at the script I wrote a while ago by the agreement with the FAQ poster:
    <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/tree/browse_frm/thread/2b234f5ba2cae095/ff73768ed44445bc?rnum=1&q=VK+FAQ&_done=%2Fgroup%2Fcomp.lang.javascript%2Fbrowse_frm%2Fthread%2F2b234f5ba2cae095%2Ff847811bc3824c2e%3Flnk%3Dgst%26q%3DVK+FAQ%26rnum%3D1%26#doc_9746a91f36066748>
    It also takes into account some particular demands for the data
    treatment. Not to say that I'm agreed with all of them: indeed one XML
    source (as in your case) for both Usenet posting and HTML display is
    much easier and up to date.

    As I understand the problem properly it is not about software per se
    but about a Usenet account. The free ones are very rare now and they
    have high tendency to disappear/be down. A payed account would create
    too much of monetary involvement for the poster. I mean it would be
    better to keep all future discussions between equal volunteers rather
    than between freebes and someone who's investing her own money on a
    monthly basis.

    If you have a free Usenet account in Denmark you would like to share,
    that would be greate to inform Mr.Cornford. One could solve at least
    this part of the problem (not the biggest one though).

    At the same time - and with deapest respect to the efforts you've spent
    - that would be not totally appropriate IMHO to start FAQ posting in
    this newsgroup without an explicit agreement with Richard Cornford; or
    without his explicit statement that this part of the problem is given
    to the public resolution.


    > Why not making a FAQ entry of that :) "What is the history of the
    > comp.lang.javascript FAQ ?"


    Not only that, but also links to all FAQ versions by years starting
    from 1996. I assure you that it is an amazing reading, reflecting the
    whole Web development history as well.

    >> VK:
    > > The whole procedure of adding/updating/removing FAQENTRY's has to be
    > > much stricter defined and narrowed. It is not good enough that 1-2-3
    > > people - however "oldposting" and knowlegeable they are - are saying
    > > "it is not a FAQ" or "it is wrong".

    >
    > Well, I'ld say that depends on the criteria that are used to make such
    > a decision, not so much on the number of persons.


    FAQ is "Frequently Asked Question(s)" ;-) So we have one *measurable*
    category independent from the private opinions: the frequency.
    It also mean that FAQ has the tendency to change by years and even
    within one year.
    In 1996 one of the tops was about using document.write() In 2005/2006
    it's ajaxoids and libraries. One FAQENTRY's are being added, others are
    being removed as useless. It is a natural everlasting process.

    > True, but I'm also convinced that many of such public discussions
    > already took place in the past, but without making it to the FAQ. Why
    > not browse the archives and extract useful information from it ?


    FAQ is not a ultimate source of answers, it is a convenience tool. It
    is much easier to read a compact article rather than search by keywords
    in old postings. Also not everyone is using Google Groups, and the
    Usenet as it is has very primitive search tools (over news agents). In
    the most cases threads older than 1-3 months are out of reach for the
    public.
    VK, Aug 1, 2006
    #5
  6. VK wrote:

    > Everyone (I'm sure) appreciate your efforts. You also may take a look
    > at the script I wrote a while ago by the agreement with the FAQ poster:
    > [skip url]
    > It also takes into account some particular demands for the data
    > treatment. Not to say that I'm agreed with all of them: indeed one XML
    > source (as in your case) for both Usenet posting and HTML display is
    > much easier and up to date.


    I'ld even go a step further. Take one database storage with a common
    API and derive all output formats you want from it (xls csv htm xml edi
    txt etc). The current data is workable, but indeed not ideal IMO. The
    weak point is data-structural, not technical. I think it's typical for
    manual XML maintenance.

    > As I understand the problem properly it is not about software per se
    > but about a Usenet account. The free ones are very rare now and they
    > have high tendency to disappear/be down. A payed account would create
    > too much of monetary involvement for the poster. I mean it would be
    > better to keep all future discussions between equal volunteers rather
    > than between freebes and someone who's investing her own money on a
    > monthly basis.
    >
    > If you have a free Usenet account in Denmark you would like to share,
    > that would be greate to inform Mr.Cornford. One could solve at least
    > this part of the problem (not the biggest one though).


    Yes, I've spent some time to find Usenet accounts, I think I've found
    some good ones.

    http://www.sunsite.dk/ (free, text-only, easy registration
    http://dotsrc.org/usenet)
    http://news.individual.net/ (10 Euro/y, text-only)
    http://www.teranews.com/ (3 Euro setup, then free)

    http://www.newzbot.com/ is a portal site dedicated to Usenet servers.
    If sunsite.dk would go down, it's easy to set another account in Perl
    script.

    > At the same time - and with deapest respect to the efforts you've spent
    > - that would be not totally appropriate IMHO to start FAQ posting in
    > this newsgroup without an explicit agreement with Richard Cornford; or
    > without his explicit statement that this part of the problem is given
    > to the public resolution.


    I hereby ask him (and anyone) what he thinks about it.

    --
    Bart
    Bart Van der Donck, Aug 1, 2006
    #6
  7. VK

    VK Guest

    Bart Van der Donck wrote:
    > Yes, I've spent some time to find Usenet accounts, I think I've found
    > some good ones.
    >
    > http://www.sunsite.dk/ (free, text-only, easy registration
    > http://dotsrc.org/usenet)
    > http://news.individual.net/ (10 Euro/y, text-only)
    > http://www.teranews.com/ (3 Euro setup, then free)
    >
    > http://www.newzbot.com/ is a portal site dedicated to Usenet servers.
    > If sunsite.dk would go down, it's easy to set another account in Perl
    > script.


    One can add here free cheap56k.com (server news.cheap56k.com)
    This is what I went for testing, but I don't like that they put random
    ads at the bottom of each post. How is sunsite.dk in this matter?

    > >- that would be not totally appropriate IMHO to start FAQ posting in
    > > this newsgroup without an explicit agreement with Richard Cornford; or
    > > without his explicit statement that this part of the problem is given
    > > to the public resolution.

    >
    > I hereby ask him (and anyone) what he thinks about it.


    Good question asking for a good answer. As we know for sure that
    Richard was here just one day ago, one could expect a prompt response.
    If no response then one could estimate with a good probability that he
    opted for the option two (the problem is given to the public
    resolution).
    VK, Aug 1, 2006
    #7
  8. Bart Van der Donck wrote:
    > VK wrote:

    <snip>
    >> As I understand the problem properly ...


    If that were the case it would be novel. But instead you have
    miss-understood as usual (nobody will be surprised by that as
    understanding what was said required the comprehension of written
    English and you just don't do that).

    >> If you have a free Usenet account in Denmark you would like to
    >> share, that would be greate to inform Mr.Cornford. One could
    >> solve at least this part of the problem (not the biggest one though).

    >
    > Yes, I've spent some time to find Usenet accounts, I think I've found
    > some good ones.

    <snip>

    You should not let VK waste your time. Generally, when VK makes a
    statement it is most efficient to just assume that it is wrong.

    >> At the same time - and with deapest respect to the efforts you've
    >> spent - that would be not totally appropriate IMHO to start FAQ
    >> posting in this newsgroup without an explicit agreement with
    >> Richard Cornford; or without his explicit statement that this
    >> part of the problem is given to the public resolution.


    Halfwit!

    > I hereby ask him (and anyone) what he thinks about it.


    It will be interesting to see if "anyone" can tell you what I think
    about it.

    Richard.
    Richard Cornford, Aug 1, 2006
    #8
  9. VK wrote:

    > Bart Van der Donck wrote:
    > > Yes, I've spent some time to find Usenet accounts, I think I've found
    > > some good ones.
    > > [skip server list]

    >
    > One can add here free cheap56k.com (server news.cheap56k.com)
    > This is what I went for testing, but I don't like that they put random
    > ads at the bottom of each post. How is sunsite.dk in this matter?


    >From the information I have, it seems sunsite.dk offers reliable/steady

    Usenet accounts. No ads.

    > > > VK:
    > > >- that would be not totally appropriate IMHO to start FAQ posting in
    > > > this newsgroup without an explicit agreement with Richard Cornford; or
    > > > without his explicit statement that this part of the problem is given
    > > > to the public resolution.

    > > BVdD:
    > > I hereby ask him (and anyone) what he thinks about it.

    > VK:
    > As we know for sure that Richard was here just one day ago, one could
    > expect a prompt response. If no response then one could estimate with
    > a good probability that he opted for the option two (the problem is given
    > to the public resolution).


    The door is open! :)

    --
    Bart
    Bart Van der Donck, Aug 1, 2006
    #9
  10. VK

    VK Guest

    <snip>

    >> Bart Van der Donck wrote:
    >> I hereby ask him (and anyone) what he thinks about it.

    > Richard Cornford wrote:
    > It will be interesting to see if "anyone" can tell you what I think
    > about it.


    Anyone can tell if the current FAQ posting situation is of the best
    interests of the community or not. If decided no, a better solution can
    be found by mutual consent (albeit passive consent in most cases).

    sunsite.dk server currently seems to be the best option for the
    automated posting. At the same it must be some commitment from the
    poster to install and to provide a minimum support of the posting bot
    for a reasonnably long period of time (one year at least).

    If Mr. Bart Van der Donck is willing to donate his time for that, he
    has my vote YES in advance.

    Also there is the official (as much as something can be "official" in
    the Usenet) FAQ server supported by MIT. They keep and maintain
    FAQ-related materials of the Usenet back to 1993. That could be a
    future option (?)

    <http://www.faqs.org/faqs/>
    <http://www.faqs.org/faq-maintainers/>
    <http://www.faqs.org/faq-maintainers/faq-server/>
    VK, Aug 2, 2006
    #10
  11. VK

    Ray Guest

    Bart Van der Donck wrote:
    > VK wrote:

    <snip>
    > Why not making a FAQ entry of that :) "What is the history of the
    > comp.lang.javascript FAQ ?"


    Heck yeah. I'm new in c.l.j. and I'm curious what's up with this FAQ
    thing and VK. Are his entries often inaccurate, and therefore mislead
    JS newbies like me, or what?

    <snip>
    Ray, Aug 2, 2006
    #11
  12. Ray wrote:
    <snip>
    > ... VK. Are his entries often inaccurate, and therefore mislead
    > JS newbies like me, or what?


    "Often inaccurate" would be an understatement. He doesn't understand
    what the code he writes himself actually does, does not know how
    javascript should be expected to behave (and has many fictional notions
    of what should be happening), has a superficial understanding of (a
    few) browser DOMs (and believes many things that are not the case) and
    has a habit of addressing "issues" (many of which are figments of his
    own imagination) by taking the worst possible approach available. He
    cannot be corrected, even by repeated detailed technical explanation,
    because he is absolutely convinced that his understanding, though
    unique, is already correct and true, and repeatedly being demonstrated
    wrong does not hint to him that his self confidence is misplaced.

    Richard.
    Richard Cornford, Aug 2, 2006
    #12
  13. VK

    Ray Guest

    Richard Cornford wrote:
    > "Often inaccurate" would be an understatement. He doesn't understand
    > what the code he writes himself actually does, does not know how
    > javascript should be expected to behave (and has many fictional notions
    > of what should be happening), has a superficial understanding of (a
    > few) browser DOMs (and believes many things that are not the case) and
    > has a habit of addressing "issues" (many of which are figments of his
    > own imagination) by taking the worst possible approach available. He
    > cannot be corrected, even by repeated detailed technical explanation,
    > because he is absolutely convinced that his understanding, though
    > unique, is already correct and true, and repeatedly being demonstrated
    > wrong does not hint to him that his self confidence is misplaced.


    Sounds like a bloody dangerous poster, especially for those new to
    JavaScript. Thanks for the warning, Richard!

    >
    > Richard.
    Ray, Aug 2, 2006
    #13
  14. Ray wrote:
    > Richard Cornford wrote:
    >> "Often inaccurate" would be an understatement. ...

    <snip>
    > Sounds like a bloody dangerous poster, especially for those new to
    > JavaScript. ...


    Yes, and doubly harmful because of the amount of time and effort
    expended trying to mitigate the damage he does, that could otherwise be
    directed more productivly.

    Richard.
    Richard Cornford, Aug 2, 2006
    #14
  15. VK

    VK Guest

    Ray wrote:
    > Heck yeah. I'm new in c.l.j. and I'm curious what's up with this FAQ
    > thing and VK. Are his entries often inaccurate, and therefore mislead
    > JS newbies like me, or what?


    <OT>
    If you are new in c.l.j. than it would be more appropriate IMHO to
    silently listen for people who are posting here for years - rather than
    discuss from the sky blue their personalities.
    If you have doubts about the factual side of the FAQ posting history I
    provided in this thread, you are welcome to search the archives by
    yourselve. If any errors are found, I will be glad to be pointed out.
    If you personally had a problem with my advise to you, please provide a
    link. I do not recall of helping you, but I do not remember each and
    every post.
    Untill then you are asked to be so kind to shut up on the off-topic
    subjects.
    </OT>

    Back to the topic of this thread:

    comp.lang.javascript FAQ posting does not work for several months now.
    It never happened before since the group was created in 1996.
    The current FAQ maintainer (Richard Cornford) did not make a thing to
    solve the situation: his spaceous and mainly nasty OT revelations of
    the kind one can see here do no help obviously.

    Mr. Bart Van der Donck has a working program and Usenet account to
    restore the posting.

    If Mr. Bart Van der Donck is willing to donate his time for that, I'm
    voting YES for him. I'm ready to donate my time either but if my
    candidature is so bad, I'm even not proposing it.

    If you want that Mr. Bart Van der Donck restored FAQ posting then vote
    YES in this thread.

    If you don't want to restore FAQ posting then vote NO.

    If you don't give a damn about this problem then vote ABSTAIN (or
    better yet do not vote at all).

    If you have nothing to say on the subject then be quiet (the same goes
    to any other potential OT posters).

    Anyone (including new posters) is welcome to vote on the subject.
    VK, Aug 2, 2006
    #15
  16. VK wrote:
    <snip>
    > <OT>

    <snip>
    > Untill then you are asked to be so kind to shut up on the
    > off-topic subjects.
    > </OT>
    >
    > Back to the topic of this thread:

    <snip>

    How often is it going to be necessary to tell you; threads do not have
    topics, they have subjects, which do not limit/restrict the matters
    discussed in the thread? Things that are off topic can only be off
    topic for the group as a whole. At the topic for the group is
    javascript the discussion of poor sources of information on javascript
    certainly is on topic for the group.

    Richard.
    Richard Cornford, Aug 2, 2006
    #16
  17. VK wrote:

    > [...]
    > If Mr. Bart Van der Donck is willing to donate his time for that, he
    > has my vote YES in advance.


    Yes, I'm willing to follow up the daily FAQ postings. I think it will
    probably take not so much time. When the FAQ gets updated, the only
    requirement would be to keep the XML's main structure:

    <FAQ>
    <TITLE>comp.lang.javascript FAQ</TITLE>
    <CONTENTS>
    <CONTENT TITLE="chapter name">
    <CONTENT TITLE="entry title">
    text with <additional> </tags> in it
    </CONTENT>
    ...more entries in the same chapter...
    </CONTENT>
    ...more chapters with their entries...
    </CONTENTS>
    </FAQ>

    I think this should normally be no problem; it was my intention to make
    this as flexible as possible towards the future.

    > [...]


    --
    Bart
    Bart Van der Donck, Aug 2, 2006
    #17
  18. Ray wrote:

    > Sounds like a bloody dangerous poster, especially for those new to
    > JavaScript. Thanks for the warning, Richard!


    I think you should relativise such statements a bit. Inaccurate
    information is mostly quickly corrected in this newsgroup, and anyone
    makes a mistake now and then (don't we all). But "bloody dangerous
    poster" is not really the word for that :)

    But yes, the technical expertise of Richard's articles is among the
    best I've ever seen, but they do require quite some javascript
    knowledge beforehand to well understand. I think their outstanding
    technical value does not always reflect their educational value.

    --
    Bart
    Bart Van der Donck, Aug 2, 2006
    #18
  19. VK

    Ray Guest

    VK wrote:
    > Ray wrote:
    > > Heck yeah. I'm new in c.l.j. and I'm curious what's up with this FAQ
    > > thing and VK. Are his entries often inaccurate, and therefore mislead
    > > JS newbies like me, or what?

    >
    > <OT>
    > If you are new in c.l.j. than it would be more appropriate IMHO to
    > silently listen for people who are posting here for years - rather than
    > discuss from the sky blue their personalities.


    I am new to JavaScript and c.l.j., therefore it is important for me and
    other JS newbies like me to know which posters we can trust to be
    knowledgeable and won't mislead us while we're still solidifying our
    foundation in the language.

    > If you have doubts about the factual side of the FAQ posting history I
    > provided in this thread, you are welcome to search the archives by
    > yourselve. If any errors are found, I will be glad to be pointed out.


    I did. I found your Vector sample code. It was
    so....................................... advanced I got speechless--as
    such I can't point anything out, sorry.

    > If you personally had a problem with my advise to you, please provide a
    > link. I do not recall of helping you, but I do not remember each and
    > every post.


    Nope, of course I don't have any problem with your advice to me since
    you haven't given me any. But obviously your (future, if any) advice
    will be way too............................................. advanced,
    for me, so that's probably alright too.

    > Untill then you are asked to be so kind to shut up on the off-topic
    > subjects.


    Yes Sensei!!!

    > </OT>
    Ray, Aug 2, 2006
    #19
  20. VK

    Ray Guest

    Bart Van der Donck wrote:
    > Ray wrote:
    >
    > > Sounds like a bloody dangerous poster, especially for those new to
    > > JavaScript. Thanks for the warning, Richard!

    >
    > I think you should relativise such statements a bit. Inaccurate
    > information is mostly quickly corrected in this newsgroup, and anyone
    > makes a mistake now and then (don't we all). But "bloody dangerous
    > poster" is not really the word for that :)


    Hi Bart,

    I'm speaking from my p.o.v. really (which is perhaps not shared by
    other newbies, if I may add). I'm new to JavaScript and I'm using it
    not as a hobby but in a project with a very, very tight deadline. As
    such, a poster like that is dangerous to me, especially because at this
    stage I can't always tell whether something is true or not, and I
    really can't afford to be misled.

    Yes, of course everybody makes mistakes :) But I am thankful that I get
    informed early on on who to listen to... and who not to listen to.

    > But yes, the technical expertise of Richard's articles is among the
    > best I've ever seen, but they do require quite some javascript
    > knowledge beforehand to well understand. I think their outstanding
    > technical value does not always reflect their educational value.


    Thanks for pointing that out! :)

    Cheers
    Ray

    >
    > --
    > Bart
    Ray, Aug 2, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.

Share This Page