Re: [NTLK] the FAQ?

I completely agree with your point of view. Really there is no point
of pointing to old outdated material. I think the load of the useless
info should be delegated to an aptly titled link.
On Oct 15, 2006, at 12:26 AM, Alex Perez wrote:

> Yes, it makes perfect sense, conceptually. One thing that I've found,
> however, is that coming across a page full of dead links is very
> frustrating, as a newbie.

Old links should go or be placed in a dead links section or just mark
the dead link text another color, preferably lighter and unobtrusive
so as not to inhibit the flow of information.

> Another factor to consider is
> information-overload.

Please, yes there is so much there at times that you just want to
turn your back on it. I don't mean to be overly critical but there is
a claustrophobic feeling on each visit. KISS.

> Presenting information which is not directly
> useful to someone who is reading an FAQ is counterproductive to the
> goals of the FAQ.

Dittoed above - KISS remark.

> Some of the more advanced wikis provide an easy way to
> cite things with links or footnotes, etc, which can be very useful for
> moving old/outdated information out of the direct view of people who
> ultimately don't care about reading antiquated cruft, in a way which
> serves to preserve it without putting the burden of sifting through
> useless information on the readers of the FAQ.

Most of it is visual organization and that can be achieved using free
pre-made themes compatible with WordPress blogging interface.
>
> Does that make sense? My apologies if that rationale seems a
> little too
> verbose.

-- 
This is the NewtonTalk list - http://www.newtontalk.net/ for all inquiries
Official Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/
WikiWikiNewt for all kinds of articles: http://tools.unna.org/wikiwikinewt/