Replied: Sat, 07 Sep 1996 18:46:57 EDT
Replied: "Johan Olofsson <jmo@lysator.liu.se> "
From jmo@lysator.liu.se	 Fri Sep  6 19:51:37 1996
Received: from MIT.EDU (SOUTH-STATION-ANNEX.MIT.EDU [18.72.1.2]) by bloom-picayune.MIT.EDU (8.6.13/2.3JIK) with SMTP id TAA08716; Fri, 6 Sep 1996 19:51:36 -0400
Received: from [130.236.254.3] by MIT.EDU with SMTP
	id AA03306; Fri, 6 Sep 96 19:51:24 EDT
Received: from tiny.lysator.liu.se (jmo@tiny.lysator.liu.se [130.236.254.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA25676; Sat, 7 Sep 1996 01:51:18 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: (from jmo@localhost) by tiny.lysator.liu.se (8.7.5/8.7.3) id BAA04594; Sat, 7 Sep 1996 01:51:13 +0200 (MET DST)
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 01:51:13 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199609062351.BAA04594@tiny.lysator.liu.se>
From: Johan Olofsson <jmo@lysator.liu.se>
To: news-answers-request@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: <9609062316.AA22107@portnoy.MIT.EDU> (emhavens@MIT.EDU)
Subject: Re: The Nordic FAQ
Return-Receipt-To: jmo@lysator.liu.se
Cc: alahelma@cc.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Hello,

 > I have a few issues still to ask you about, though.  First,
 > what exactly do you want to do with the archive names. 

I would like to do it exactly as in the versions sent to you some
weeks ago, 

.../part1_INTRODUCTION
.../part2_NORDEN
.../part3_DENMARK

 > You should
 > either have them be nordic-faq/introduction or nordic-faq/part1 (and
 > similarly for each part).  For now, I'm going to leave each part the
 > first way, with the names.

If you decide so, then I of course have to accept your decision, but
that way the introduction does not come on top of an alphabetic
listing, which is the way the files are presented when searched by FTP
or at many of the faq archives at the WWW.

The advantage of this is even greater when a part get splited, which
doesn't seem too unlikely given the size of some of the parts being
well above 100 kB.

The clarity of an alphabetic listing is gaining from the proposal
above as it with minimal changes could be extended to:

.../part2a_NORDEN
.../part2b_LAPPLAND
.../part2c_MYTHOLOGY
.../part2d_CULTURE
.../part2e_SOCIETY 

for the part about Norden as a whole, and likewise

.../part3a_DENMARK
.../part3b_HISTORY
.../part3c_TOURISM
.../part3d_CULTURE

and so on for the parts regarding the five specific states.


 > Second, the expiration time at each site differs.
 > It may be about 6 months there, but it's about 2 weeks here.  However,
 > if you'd like to keep it as a year, that's fine.  So, for now, here's
 > what I'm entering into the database:

That's good. My intention is to use the Supersedes:-header INSTEAD of
short expiration times, and thereby providing the sites where the
*.answers groups are prioritized with the best possible service. Other
sites are less of a concern for me. If the person in charge decides to
let *.answers articles expires after short time, then the users at
that site most probably are used to searching FAQ:s by WWW in any
case.

It will (probably soon) become actual to regularly post a abbreviated
version of the first part, including an index for the total content of
the FAQ and directions how to obtain the faq via ftp - etcetera. Maybe
this better should be posted to the *.answers groups too?

Do you have any suitable archive name and subject line to propose, not
too resembling the archive names for the ordinary faq.

 > 
[inclusion deleted by folder-shrink.pl]