Parse::Recdescent::FAQ --- plateauing?

metaperl on 2003-10-24T13:23:59

I am fairly happy with the organization of the FAQ. I just discovered the "=head4" tag, so I will be changing some "=over 4 =item* =back" over to that soon to improve the TOC.

I might write something to automate a google search as pretty much all resources (save perlmonks?) that I use to beef up the FAQ be they news or web exist on google somewhere.

---

Google PerlMonks.thepen.com

Louis_Wu on 2003-10-24T23:42:40

You can google PerlMonks thanks to blakem's nice static archive at perlmonks.thepen.com. I have a nice little google search link which puts the site="" stuff in the field for you.

You can find more at thepen's homenode, (That's the user which is used to duplicate the info for the static site.), at the original announcement in 2001 (on my birthday!), and at the FAQ on searching the Monastery.

Have fun searching.

Re:Google PerlMonks.thepen.com

metaperl on 2003-10-25T01:00:14

yeah, the pen comes up via google. I will check out your search link the next time I beef up the FAQ. thanks.

One little gripe ...

rob_au on 2003-10-25T01:47:30

One thing which I think could be better done in the Parse::RecDescent FAQ is the attribution or reference of sources so that, in the instance where questions have been directly taken from other sources, readers have the opportunity to follow through back with the original source for further discussions.

I found this element lacking after I found one such question which I asked on Perlmonks included verbatim in the FAQ with attribution or reference - Whilst I don't have any problem in the least with the lack of attribution, I think it would have been nice for a link back to the original thread on Perlmonks for further reading.

Re:One little gripe ...

metaperl on 2003-10-25T16:54:19

I think you are right about referencing things and there certainly could be an issue with giving credit where credit is due.

If you have any patches to the FAQ I am glad to add them.