Maintain FAQ

D

dhtml

Hey,

Nobody is maintaining the FAQ and it's gathering dust. It needs a new
maintainer.

The c.l.js FAQ might also be better off on a different host because
Jim's server is so often down.
 
T

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn

dhtml said:
Nobody is maintaining the FAQ and it's gathering dust. It needs a new
maintainer.

I am still willing, public opinion does not appear to have changed from
March, and now that my regular studies are coming to an end (aside from the
thesis), I think I can make the time. Have you received my e-mail of
2011-03-13?
The c.l.js FAQ might also be better off on a different host because
Jim's server is so often down.

ACK. I was already thinking about suggesting to Jim to move the FAQ to my
site if and when I was appointed FAQ maintainer, as that would have made my
task a lot easier (using SVN and stuff). One reason why I e-mailed you in
March.


PointedEars
 
D

Dr J R Stockton

In comp.lang.javascript message <[email protected]>,
Thu, 30 Jun 2011 18:25:00, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
I am still willing, public opinion does not appear to have changed from
March, and now that my regular studies are coming to an end (aside from the
thesis), I think I can make the time. Have you received my e-mail of
2011-03-13?

In that case we would need another FAQ not maintained by TL. To be
effective, a FAQ maintainer must be a competent communicator. Mere
knowledge is insufficient.


Garrett : assuming that you still have FAQ-editing powers, I suggest
that you add to it a note that it is not currently being updated.

Let it also have a link to something called "Thomas's ECMAScript FAQ",
on his site, where he can write to his heart's content.
 
D

dhtml

In comp.lang.javascript message <[email protected]>,
Thu, 30 Jun 2011 18:25:00, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn



In that case we would need another FAQ not maintained by TL.  To be
effective, a FAQ maintainer must be a competent communicator.  Mere
knowledge is insufficient.
Knowledge in general is helpful. Technical knowledge EcmaScript,
browsers, html, css, OOD is an important trait.

Communication is an essential trait for the job.


Communication includes FAQ editing which includes coherent, succinct
writing as well as clean code.

Communication also includes listening understanding, and seeing things
from others' perspective.

Listening entails providing feedback, e.g. "it sounds like you're
saying [...]" or "did you mean [...]". In contrast, replies like
"irrelevant" and "fallacy" and especially childish things like "score
adjusted" hinder communication and decimate the quality of the group.
Such things discourage brainstorming.
Garrett : assuming that you still have FAQ-editing powers, I suggest
that you add to it a note that it is not currently being updated.
Will do. Today, the weather is extraordinarily beautiful. Perhaps
tonight or tomorrow.
Let it also have a link to something called "Thomas's ECMAScript FAQ",
on his site, where he can write to his heart's content.
Where will the FAQ will be hosted? By whom it will be maintained and
by what process will the maintainer will be chosen? So far, it looks
as if Lahn is the only candidate.

I was pulling for Weiss, RobG, or Juriy. IMO, Lasse would also be a
good maintainer, if he has time for it.
 
D

Dr J R Stockton

In comp.lang.javascript message <EZ6dnRdpG7Ebz5PTnZ2dnUVZ8iudnZ2d@gigane
We already have that.

In fact what we have is an FAQ not maintained by anybody. If you think
that's how it should be, you can always download the current content and
preserve it.

Well, if you search back in the group, you should see that I keep and
offer a copy of the FAQ at <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/$clj-faq.htm>;
it would have been useful if the FAQ itself had said so. You should
also see that I have a copy, annotated with some older suggestions, at
<http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/js-faq-a.htm>, and some suggested larger
improvements at <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/js-faq-u.htm>.

ISTM that at least the final version from each maintainer should be
preserved. I also possess a late Cornford (8.1 - 2005-11-05), a late
Webb (9.91 - 2008-01-19), an earlier Smith (19, July 12, 2009), but no
Ley (Wayback should have it).

I'd prefer a maintained FAQ. AFAIK, Thomas Lahn is the only
person who has offered to take over, and he says he has the
infrastructure to keep the FAQ online.
If nobody else steps forward, he should become the new maintainer.

When I did a FAQ, I obtained a favourable vote of approval first.
 
M

Mike Duffy

In comp.lang.javascript message



When I did a FAQ, I obtained a favourable vote of approval first.

When someone wins a position by acclamation, there is no point in voting.
 
E

Evertjan.

Dr J R Stockton wrote on 03 jul 2011 in comp.lang.javascript:
ISTM that at least the final version from each maintainer should be
preserved. I also possess a late Cornford (8.1 - 2005-11-05), a late
Webb (9.91 - 2008-01-19), an earlier Smith (19, July 12, 2009), but no
Ley (Wayback should have it).

Perhaps posting the url would suffice:

<http://wayback.archive.org/web/*/http://www.jibbering.com/faq/>

the first one of 198 captures being
the version by Jim Ley on 6 Dec 2000 22:00:

<http://web.archive.org/web/200012062202/http://jibbering.com/faq/>
 
D

Dr J R Stockton

In comp.lang.javascript message <[email protected]>
Dr J R Stockton wrote on 03 jul 2011 in comp.lang.javascript:


Perhaps posting the url would suffice:

<http://wayback.archive.org/web/*/http://www.jibbering.com/faq/>

the first one of 198 captures being
the version by Jim Ley on 6 Dec 2000 22:00:

<http://web.archive.org/web/200012062202/http://jibbering.com/faq/>

We should not rely on that, or any other, system to continue to exist.

I have extracted what seems to be Jim Ley's last, comp.lang.javascript
FAQ - 7.9 - 2003-06-30, removing from it Wayback's added script and
making the links local again.

The FAQ should contain that general URL, and the dates of the first
archived version of each maintainer or the dates between which they were
active.


There is also the question of the FAQ Notes maintenance. Since they are
not posted here, I consider them to have only the authority of their
anonymous author.

The maintainer should upload the FAQ to at least two independent Web
sites.
 
J

Jukka K. Korpela

In fact what we have is an FAQ not maintained by anybody.

That’s not uncommon on Usenet these days. And many groups have no FAQ.
It seems that Usenet has been dying some years with little hope of real
recovery. Comp.lang.javascript may survive longer than most other
groups. But lack of FAQ maintenance may indicate that the group will
inevitably die in a non-distant future. It may technically continue its
existence but perhaps degrade to a noise-only group (there are surely
symptoms of that).

It’s better to die with some dignity, with a dusty (but useful) FAQ,
rather than with a troll’s creation declared as a FAQ.
AFAIK, Thomas Lahn is the only
person who has offered to take over, and he says he has the
infrastructure to keep the FAQ online.
If nobody else steps forward, he should become the new maintainer.

That’s absurd. You don’t nominate someone just because nobody else steps
forward; there is no law that a group must have a FAQ, and a group
should have a FAQ only if it reasonably well gives answers to frequently
asked questions in a useful way.

He needs to prove himself competent of maintaining a FAQ. Surely if he
tried to help people, his postings would address the questions asked
instead of pointless and often incorrect nitpicking and useless
lectures. I don’t see how any FAQ would be improved on such a basis.
 
R

RobG

2011-07-02 2:04, Stefan Weiss wrote: [...]
 AFAIK, Thomas Lahn is the only
person who has offered to take over, and he says he has the
infrastructure to keep the FAQ online.
If nobody else steps forward, he should become the new maintainer.

That’s absurd.

I don't think so.
You don’t nominate someone just because nobody else steps
forward;

I didn't see it as a nomination, but as a vote (as informal as that
may be) for someone who has been nominated and is the only one to
accept the nomination. He has my support, for what it's worth.

there is no law that a group must have a FAQ, and a group
should have a FAQ only if it reasonably well gives answers to frequently
asked questions in a useful way.

Most of the questions to which the CLJ FAQ provides answers are now
asked on stackoverflow[1]. If the FAQ was directed at questions asked
frequently *here* it would be very short.

He needs to prove himself competent of maintaining a FAQ.

I think he has.


1. <URL: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/javascript >
 
M

Mike Duffy

A Lahn/Stockton team would be interesting.

I offer myself to do the translating for both of them into "standard" (US)
english. As a resident of Quebec, I am linguistically uniquely-placed to be
able to pull this off without offending anyone.

Seriously, my level of competence in Javascript is probably the correct
amount. It is low enough that I can remember asking the ill-informed
questions we see here from beginners, and yet high enough that I can make
my Ajax code work even though I cannot actually explain closures.

Despite their differing philosophies, I have found both TL & Dr. S (& Jukka
& Evertjan & Garrett & DM & Richard C. & RobG & many, many others!!) to be
extrememly helpful to me over the years, either by response to one of my
queries, or indirectly via their suffering of other fools.

What I propose is to translate missives into a "dumbed-down" version
understandable by someone who (like myself) has never actually read an
entry-level Javascript reference, preferring instead to work things out on
a "need to know" basis.
 
R

RobG

Only one person has volunteered to take over as FAQ maintainer. He has
also volunteered to host it.

The state of the current FAQ is irrelevant, it is mostly unreachable
and can't be used reliably for reference.

Please give the keys to Thomas. Without a maintained FAQ this new
group is dead.
 
D

Dr J R Stockton

In comp.lang.javascript message <d11d6639-4f3e-4fb1-8bc4-e97c047237bb@f3
9g2000prb.googlegroups.com>, Mon, 18 Jul 2011 21:35:28, RobG
The state of the current FAQ is irrelevant, it is mostly unreachable
and can't be used reliably for reference.

An exact search with Google for "Version 32.2, Updated 2010-10-08, by
Garrett Smith" shows one result, the copy at jibbering.

But Google also says "In order to show you the most relevant results, we
have omitted some entries very similar to the 1 already displayed. If
you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results included.".

If you do that, you are shown another result, which is an annotated
version.

And if you follow the link in sig line 3 and read the links part near
the end, you can reach a copy of Version 32.2, by a route which Google
does not follow.

Is it known how many copies of the FAQ are read from jibbering (when
working) per week? Can that be split into full copies fetched, and ones
where the user finds that the jibbering one is unchanged so he can use a
cached version, if that applies?
 
R

RobG

In comp.lang.javascript message <d11d6639-4f3e-4fb1-8bc4-e97c047237bb@f3
9g2000prb.googlegroups.com>, Mon, 18 Jul 2011 21:35:28, RobG


An exact search with Google for "Version 32.2, Updated 2010-10-08, by
Garrett Smith" shows one result, the copy at jibbering.

I don't think posting links to a static copy is a suitable
alternative. What impression is given when I provide a link to a
static copy because the original is unreliable? Or if I link to a
resource that may be, or may not be (and increasingly isn't),
available? And isn't maintained?


[...]
And if you follow the link in sig line 3 and read the links part near
the end, you can reach a copy of Version 32.2, by a route which Google
does not follow.

An unmaintained copy will go out of date just as quickly as the
original it was copied from.

Is it known how many copies of the FAQ are read from jibbering (when
working) per week? Can that be split into full copies fetched, and ones
where the user finds that the jibbering one is unchanged so he can use a
cached version, if that applies?

I should be able to provide URLs to the actual, attained resource.
Isn't that the point of them? If caching is appropriate, "the system"
will work that out for me.

Using Google's cached pages is not an option either, many enterprise
sites simply block access in the same way they block social media,
online email and any other generic group of sites they deem "not
appropriate for work"[1].

But none of this is fixing the FAQ issue, which can be very simply
resolved.


1. It is amazing hypocrisy when the organisations that introduce such
blocking often make wide use such sites for their own marketing and
public relations purposes.
 
D

Dr J R Stockton

In comp.lang.javascript message <a4e3b885-8cfa-4778-964e-388d20f03ac5@q2
9g2000prj.googlegroups.com>, Wed, 20 Jul 2011 20:07:26, RobG
I don't think posting links to a static copy is a suitable
alternative. What impression is given when I provide a link to a
static copy because the original is unreliable?

A rather better impression than if only the original link is given, and
it does not work. Everyone should understand about backups.
Or if I link to a
resource that may be, or may not be (and increasingly isn't),
available? And isn't maintained?

Most of the FAQ as Garrett left it is still useful. Likewise for Randy,
Richard, and Jim. And a reader should read the release date.

[...]
And if you follow the link in sig line 3 and read the links part near
the end, you can reach a copy of Version 32.2, by a route which Google
does not follow.

An unmaintained copy will go out of date just as quickly as the
original it was copied from.

My car still works, though I suspect that it would be illegal to sell
new ones of that design.

I should be able to provide URLs to the actual, attained resource.
Isn't that the point of them? If caching is appropriate, "the system"
will work that out for me.

True, but not the answer to the question. The answer would show the
actual load on jibbering, from which I could decide whether to let
search engines see my publicly-accessible copy of the FAQ.



Our French members might like - pause to Google some French words, which
found an unknown & better copy of them - to see my gravity4.htm#LIS .
 

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Similar Threads


Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,744
Messages
2,569,484
Members
44,903
Latest member
orderPeak8CBDGummies

Latest Threads

Top