Bill,
The line blurs here - I've seen blogs operated that look and feel
identically to forums.
The big + on the blog is the rss feed mechanism. Plus - I think
that most TC chairs would want to manage this somewhat depending on
their TC needs.
The ability to have a FAQ built-in to the blog is also appealing -
that can be quickly updated to respond to input, etc - the sidebar
menuing on blog is perfect for that use.
The member mail archive lists already have that feel - it may be
conflicting to have two such.
A forum is a little too ad hoc at times! ; -)
DW
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re:
[chairs] TC FAQ Template
From: Bill Parducci
<>
Date: Tue, February 14, 2006
4:34 pm
To: "David RR Webber (XML)" <>
Cc:
, Jeff
Mischkinsky
<>
i would offer
that a forum is better suited to (persistent) Q&A where
a
blog is more editorially oriented. since i thought that the purpose
was to allow for some form of reusable public Q&A a forum
would be
the better choice in that it allows users to create
topics that can
start threads of
discussion.
b
On Feb 14, 2006, at 12:20 PM, David RR
Webber (XML) wrote:
> Bill,
>
> OK - weeds,
eh?
>
> The blogger environment allows you to create
persistent html pages
> - complete with archive and
indexing - as well as the RSS content -
> and Google
search loves it all!
>
> DW
>
>
>
-------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [chairs] TC FAQ
Template
> From: Bill Parducci
<>
> Date: Tue, February 14,
2006 1:07 pm
> To: Jeff Mischkinsky
<>
> Cc:
>
> without spinning to far out
into the weeds i would suggest that a
> forum would be a better
solution here. the are searchable,
> 'skinnable', can easily be
setup to allow anonymous reads (good for
> google searches ;o)
while requiring authentication (read: "by signing
> up you agree
to abide by X "), typically have RSS feed capabilities
> and
allow you to keep things in some sort of order by
topic.
>
> b
