[webdev] Re: evolution

[Tom Hull <thull@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Koji Hayakawa wrote:
> 
> I checked those FAQ engines out a while ago.  I'm not sure what I really
> should be looking for in FAQ-O-Matic.  All of them claim to be pretty simple
> stuff, but I don't know about that, especially if we want to incorporate
> into some schematic system...  Zope, ACS, or plain php pages.

I just took a quick look at ACS. It supports multiple FAQs, each with group
permissions determining who can ask/answer questions. Q&A are stored in the
database. This is sort of a minimal filing system, not very impressive. I
don't have a reasonable test FAQ, so I haven't looked at the UI, but I don't
expect much there either.

I suspect most FAQ programs are variants on this, with more/less open submission
of Q and/or A. (Comments on wiki below.) I hypothesized some desirable features
earlier, including the ability to match similar questions: i.e., I ask a 
question,
system looks for an exact match, failing that, offers a list of possible 
matches;
I can then choose a match, or add a new question. Questions have some hierarchy
or graph organization, and new questions can then be passed on to area experts
(or whoever maintains an area, expert or not). Answers can be evaluated; i.e.,
user can say that a given answer is great or blows (or some intermediary) or
append a new question.

I've seen some company websites that have natural language front ends for
their FAQ documentation; generally speaking, they're junk, but it's a nice
idea. For our purposes, a form where you could type "configure ppp" ought
to be able to find a useful Q&A. At that level it might not be a blue sky
programming project.

> I remember some of them use plain text files for storage of data, some
> others use sql database.  Some of them need to be compiled, others were
> script pages.  I don't really know how these features would fit into the new
> site design.

I suspect we'd like a sql database _and_ a keyword search engine (on Q, maybe
on A as well).

> And also, would wiki itself be considered as a candidate for FAQ-O-Matic, or
> is it just not good idea?

A wiki is probably the bare bones minimum tool. It lacks structure, depends
on cooperation, etc. It might be OK for dummying something up, but wouldn't
work for high use. Of all the things LUGs typically do, Q&A ranks pretty
high.

As I recall (I haven't looked at it in several years), FAQ-O-Matic is sort
of a better structured wiki.

> Koji
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: webdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:webdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxx]On Behalf
> > Of Tom Hull
> > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 4:56 PM
> >
> > >  * Automated FAQ system. FAQ-O-Matic or something similar
> >
> > I listed several FAQ systems on the wiki. Could someone take a
> > look at them?
> > What's good/bad/ugly, etc. There's a FAQ-O-Matic in use at the San Antonio
> > LUG; I wasn't very impressed with it, but didn't look too closely.

-- 
/*
 *  Tom Hull * thull at kscable.com * http://www.tomhull.com/
 */