Re: IAFA templates: a user's comment

[Martijn Koster <[e-mail]>]

In message <v02110108aba3a6a00860@[128.240.3.154]>, Jill Foster writes:

> I've never liked the way variants are handled. It's ugly and not
> template user (filler in) friendly. (I did say this right in the
> early stages years ago.)

So lets see: Jill Foster think's it's ugly, I think they're gross,
Alan doesn't care for them, and the IESG doens't like them either. I
have said in the past we should probably keep them because of the
legacy, but after all this *is* a draft. Sounds to me like they need
to go, or at the very least marked as deprecated.

>We're trying to base the TRAINMAT templates on the IAFA moving targets -

:-) If it's easier/better I'd prefer to freeze a trimmed-down version
NOW and then argue about additions later...

>but have not really used the variants format. We want to - but have hedged
>round it a little for practical reasons. (Difficult to provide a general
>purpose template that could be filled in by a non-iafa guru without a user
>manual.)

Yes, and that's v. bad.

> Different versions/formats of a piece of network training material
> should have only one template in order that people can find them as
> a group and decide which suits them best and so that template
> maintainers don't have to complete 50 templates for one resource
> (they just won't do it).

So would you say it's more important to have the one description
pointing to "somewhere" where all these files are, than explicit
mapping between variants and locations?

-- Martijn
__________
Internet: [e-mail]
X-400: C=GB; A= ; P=Nexor; O=Nexor; S=koster; I=M
WWW: http://web.nexor.co.uk/mak/mak.html