[Bug-gnupedia] Re: Article layour

[Giles Burdett]

Hi Imran

On 20-Jan-01, you wrote:

> [...] 
> <revision date>
> 
> A last update date so readers can know when an article may be out of date.
> 
> (we should standardize the date format dd/mm/yyyy or mm/dd/yyyy)

How should we accommodate those documents that are not dated using the
Gregorian system?

> <article ID>
> 
> A fingerprint of the article + revision date. The fingerprint should be
> taken from the first version of the article and kept for all revisions.
> 
> If a revision breaks away significantly from a previous article it should
> be given a new fingerprint and version number.

How much does it take to "break away"? Is this somthing the author/modifier
of the article would decide on, or something the server could decide on? And
would the new ID contain elements of the original ID, to indicate that it is
a relation of its parent article?

> <previous article ID>
> 
> If an article based upon another is given a new article-ID it should also
> include a link to the article it was based upon.

I suppose you could do it like that too...

Which way would be better if you had an article that was a hybrid of two or
more other articles?

Giles Burdett