On Wednesday 28 November 2001 03:48 pm, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > I added these to the developer's FAQ. The seem a little detailed for
> > the main docs.
> I was always under the impression that a FAQ was an *abbreviated* version
> of some of the main docs. As in, FAQ = frequently asked questions, main
> docs = all possible questions. So this reasoning doesn't make sense to
> me.
FAQ = questions from users on how the thing works, with answers gleaned
fromthe developer's mailing list (this has been the definition for at least
ten years -- or more -- but, as I've only been internet-literate for a mere
ten years, I wouldn't have first-hand knowledge of accepted practice prior to
1991. As I ran a C-News site beginning in 1991, I got up to speed on the
Jargon fairly quickly. Speaking of Jargon.... according to Jargoogle, FAQ is
'officially':
"FAQ /F-A-Q/ or /fak/ n.
[Usenet] 1. A Frequently Asked Question. 2. A compendium of accumulated lore,
posted periodically to high-volume newsgroups in an attempt to forestall such
questions. Some people prefer the term `FAQ list' or `FAQL' /fa'kl/,
reserving `FAQ' for sense 1.
This lexicon itself serves as a good example of a collection of one kind of
lore, although it is far too big for a regular FAQ posting. Examples: "What
is the proper type of NULL?" and "What's that funny name for the #
character?" are both Frequently Asked Questions. Several FAQs refer readers
to this file. "
So, while Bruce isn't doing the regular list posting of the dev FAQ, it still
is a compendium in sense 2....)
docs = our take on the questions we think will be asked about how the thing
works, plus any FAQL's necessary.
While it may seem to be hairsplitting, the traditional FAQ list is just
exactly what Bruce has developed in the developers FAQ -- these are answers
that currently don't fit in our docs in an organized fashion. Now, maybe if
the docs were modified to include this information... (hint, hint)....
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11