Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ncar!ico!rcd
From: rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.postscript
Subject: Re: Frequently Asked Questions
Summary: too volatile for FAQ
Message-ID: <1990Aug22.035237.15509@ico.isc.com>
Date: 22 Aug 90 03:52:37 GMT
References: <5776@adobe.UUCP> <2411@dsacg4.dsac.dla.mil>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Interactive Systems Corporation, Boulder, CO
Lines: 30

nol2321@dsacg4.dsac.dla.mil (Jim Dunn) wrote about the proposed FAQ list.

(In passing - Jim: your article has a badly-broken header line; you're
getting your email address into the Followup-To: line.)

Jim's questions are things like "what's the most cost-effective...?" or
"which app [or printer] should I use?" or "which is the easiest...?"

Questions like these are interesting and important, but it's hard to
package up canned answers because (1) they're subjective and (2) they're
always changing.  In fact, I'd say they more properly make up the substance
of the actual discussion in the group.  FAQ is typically to handle the stuff
that doesn't need to be discussed much; it has "pat" answers.  There are
examples in Carl Orthlieb's article--a typical one is "What is encapsulated
PostScript?"  It's a common question and it has a relatively simple answer
that's not subject to much debate...so we don't need ten variants of the
answer posted every time someone asks it.

In other words, FAQ is a way to offload the stuff the regular readers know
so that the discussion can focus on things under contention.  Also, it's a
good idea to keep seriously debatable stuff out of FAQ because otherwise a
bi-monthly posting generates a bi-monthly rehash of the same discussions
and flames.

I'm not trying to discourage the subjects Jim mentioned.  Quite the
contrary; I think his issues deserve active discussion instead of the
passive place in FAQ.
-- 
Dick Dunn     rcd@ico.isc.com -or- ico!rcd       Boulder, CO   (303)449-2870
   ...Are you making this up as you go along?