Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.mixmin.net!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!news.solani.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn Newsgroups: comp.lang.javascript Subject: FAQ (was: Onclick event doesnt work in webkit browser) Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 20:19:58 +0200 Organization: PointedEars Software (PES) Lines: 59 Message-ID: <3372847.a2fWeYv6oO@PointedEars.de> References: <8abf830c-8a3d-432e-8414-fe5f9c48cedf@googlegroups.com> Reply-To: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit X-Trace: solani.org 1408213223 4500 eJwFwYkBwCAIA8CV0BCecUSb/UfoHRErbnownKIgFObU7bGzI/eUbW/po3Exn7dDg7rv6Rh/FScRBA== (16 Aug 2014 18:20:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@news.solani.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 18:20:23 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: KNode/4.13.3 X-User-ID: eJwFwYEBwDAEBMCVCO9lHFT2H6F3sNAYeiAcD28ULTz3PGt/k0HU2m61+tRF3aVaS2kqpNggJcep++VK/VcBFYQ= Cancel-Lock: sha1:UImNX9UN337i+Irb0VYGlzMYx7U= X-NNTP-Posting-Host: eJwNxsEBwCAIA8CVSIGA46gl+4/Q3uvSCd4KJiOVml3Qsf5r3H7Fp44hlxrTr3osorxFLMzCByTFEOQ= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.javascript:25698 Christoph M. Becker wrote: > John Harris wrote: >> On Sat, 16 Aug 2014 02:09:55 +0200, "Christoph M. Becker" >> wrote: >>> And because you might have missed it, because you are using the worst >>> interface to Usenet, namely Google Groups: please read and heed the >>> newsgroup's rules regarding posting: >>> . >> You really shouldn't point newcomers to documents that have not gone >> through a peer review process nor gone through an approval process. > > I am wondering whether and when > has gone through a peer > review or an approval process. The „comp.lang.javascript FAQ“ [1] was based on discussions in the newsgroup, but I do not know to what extent this section is based on them. IIRC the previous maintainer, Garrett Smith, was criticized for not having run several changes through a peer review. AIUI he abandoned maintainance in part for not having to face the mostly destructive criticism anymore. To my knowledge there was no approval process – which to me is the whole point of having a maintainer: to have a person to whom you delegate the responsibility of making an informed decision based on what people think because it is too difficult, maybe even impossible, for all of them agree on a point. That said, it is better to present a FAQ’s content as recommendations than as rules. The „FAQ for comp.lang.javascript“ (see signature) is supposed to be based on discussions in the newsgroup as well, as I said when I announced it in December 2012 [2] following a discussion in the newsgroup and on Twitter [3]. Since then, I have received a little feedback from few people (including you, thank you again). I am thinking of a slightly different approach to editing now that might improve the situation. > But as you prefer I will point newcommers to this document and other > information on , which is unmaintained > since several years--a fact that is not likely going to change. Suum > cuique. It is probably not a good idea to change one’s approach solely based on the opinion of a person who has hardly, if ever, contributed anything to this newsgroup in the sense that their contribution was on-topic. So far, with changes that are merely editorial in nature, the “FAQ for comp.lang.javascript” is identical to the “comp.lang.javascript FAQ” (which is unfortunate as that means that for the most part it contains the same errors and outdated information; the changelog can confirm this). ___________ [1] [2] [3] -- PointedEars, editor FAQ: | SVN: Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.