BILAGA A

Exempel på meddelanden, alternativt textunits som grundar för de huvudsakliga kategorierna Tagande, Givande, Diskussion och Administrativt (alla tillhörande den kunskapsförmedlande dimensionen).

Tagande:

*Message: 5 108
++ Text units 112-144:
Hello, folks, 112
I'm working on a site and am trying to figure out the best way to organize 113
it relative to browser optimization. 114
I've been writing in HTML 3.2 and using tables even on pages that are 115
primarily text just to provide some margins - even if there's only one
<TD> 116
in the entire table, with the width set to 95% and the table centered,
that 117
provides the effect I'm after. (I have to use <BR>Ê<BR> to emulate <P> 118
for validation since <P> isn't supposed to appear inside a table in 3.2 - 119
though the browsers seem to understand it just fine.) 120
Now, midway through the project, I decided it's time to start implementing 121
HTML 4.0 and CSS2. 122
I can view these docs in a browser that doesn't support them, and though
it 123
looks fine, it doesn't have the margins I want. So, though it degrades 124
gracefully, I miss the margins. 125
Here's what I'm wondering at: Should I swallow my pride and let the site 126
degrade gracefully to marginlessness, OR should I write two versions of 127
everything, test for browser, and send the user along accordingly? 128
AND IF I do the latter - is it easier to have two separate directories and 129
keep all the same filenames, or in the same directory alter the filenames
in 130
some uniform manner as well as the links in each? (This would have the 131
advantage of not having to re-do image paths or replicate the image 132
directory.) 133
Just puzzling over this and thought some input from you might save me a
few 134
miles. 135
Thanks, 136
Michael Gerholdt 137
PS Actually, it doesn't really degrade all that gracefully if I use HTML
4.0 138
and CSS2 very fully. Paragraphs I want bold will be in the 4.0 page but
not in the 3.x browser. (As in a question paragraph with heavier
font-weight.) 139
Background image won't be displayed. 140
So, I have to be redundant anyway and provide the information in multiple 141
ways, or just not implement CSS very fully and let HTML do more of the 142
work - which somewhat defeats the ease of using CSS. Fair assessment? 143
Michael Gerholdt

Givande:

*Message: 4 81
++ Text units 95-106:
We are on Site-works now and get a lot for our money. We get 100mb for 95
29.95 a month and for $5 more we can get 150mb. We also get Secure Server 96
Access, FTP/Telnet access account with 4 gig monthly transfer allowance. 97
Each account comes with pre-configured, ready-to-run CGI scripts: Guest 98
Book, Free-for-all links page, Message Board, Site Database and Site
Search 99
Engine, Counters, Forms, Random Text or Graphics Displayer, You may also 100
write your own scripts, Microsoft FrontPage 98 server extensions, Three 101
POP3 accounts, unlimited email aliases, Unlimited, easy-to-use 102
auto-responders, Unlimited, technical support provided 24-hours-a-day, 7 103
days-a-week, and Majordomo list server. I would hate to see what this cost 104
at simplenet....Gary 105
Gary Bland

Diskussion:

*Message: 32 649
++ Text units 697-698:
PPK favorite weapon of Bond James Bond :-) 697
Gary Bland 698

*Message: 33 700
++ Text units 717-719:
>PPK favorite weapon of Bond James Bond :-) 717
Hmmmm.....fortunately I have no idea what you mean. 718
Star-chaser favorite enemy of Bond James Bond...?
ppk

Administrativt - reglerande:

*Message: 8 187

Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1998 10:36:28 188
From: M Gruenhagen 189
Subject: ADM Posting Off Topic Even for WDF 190
Re: [[wdf] Re: Please help Australia] post. 191
Justin is correct. This sort of post is way off topic an unacceptable
material 192
for the WDF list. If you want to send something like this out please do
it in 193
private to your own personal e-mail list, not to the group. 194
We are in the process of updating the guidelines and the new version will
be 195
sent out to the list when it is completed. 196
Certain recent events have shown that the guidelines were lacking many 197
restrictions, to which we apologize and will go about rectifying post
haste. 198
If you have any suggestions for things we may have left out of the
guidelines 199
please send them to me in private. I will be happy to take them into 200
consideration. 201
Also when responding to me privately regarding WDF please leave [wdf] out
of the 202
subject line as it will get forwarded along with all the other WDF
threads to my 203
WDF folder. I would like all the private responses to go to my Inbox so
they 204
don't get mixed up. 205
Thanks. 206
Sincerely, 207
Melissa Gruenhagen 208
WDF Administrator 209

Administrativt - utvecklande:

*Message: 14 306

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 02:46:29 -0300 307
From: Tim Rivera 308
Subject: ADM: Reply to -- what do you think? 309
Greetings, Melissa and I have been discussing this, and we decided to ask
you all for 310
your opinion. Should "Reply to Sender" go to the actual sender of the 311
post, or straight to the list? 312
I thought it would be best to have "Reply to Sender" go to the sender, and 313
"Reply to All" go to the sender and the list. My reason: 314
Those of you familiar with other lists are used to it being this way. A 315
change could result in private e-mails getting sent to the list. 316
Now that I think about it, it would be easier to just choose "Reply to 317
Sender" and not have to delete the sender's address. Since private 318
responses wouldn't be sent as often as public responses and it doesn't 319
take long to receive the posts, I think we could have "Reply to Sender" go 320
to the list. It would be easier to type/paste the sender's address into 321
the "To:" field in the event you want to send a private response than to 322
have to delete the sender's address each time you send a reply to the 323
list. 324
Please voice your opinion in this matter. We will set up the "Reply to 325
Sender" based on the results of this thread. 326
Thank you 327
Tim Rivera 328
WDF Administrator 329

NÄSTA  FÖREGÅENDE