[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Type 44 list, sub-lists
I think if we expect to be able to come up with some sort of system that
handles the problem at the majordomo end we are not addressing the real
problem.
Contributors to the list, those with valuable information and insight as
well as those with specific experience are often answering the same
problems/questions over and over again. If the serious contributors are the
ones to take the time to index their replies appropriately then the rest who
cannot be bothered to do so will be ignored. I mean really who cares? If I
am responding to someone's question and I am serious about my answer and
believe it to have value to others, I will take that little extra time to
create an index for it.
The index and structure thereof can be posted on the home page of
www.audifans.com as a FAQ or prerequisite to really gaining access to
valuable information.
Lets look at how we could structure part of it the FAQ would break down the
index into it's parts and present options;
Using this format as an example the type section of the FAQ could look like
this:
>>Use the next Location to Enter the Body Type Code that correspond to the
vehicle in question
>> -- / -- / ---- / ---- / ## / -- / -- / -
>>
>> where ## is replaced with:
>> 44 - 5000 series - 100 series - 200 series
>> 90
>> 80
>> .
>> .
>> .
>>Use the next Location to Enter the Engine Code that correspond to the
vehicle in question
>>
>> -- / -- / ---- / ---- / -- / ## / -- / -
>>
>> where ## is replaced with:
>> MC
>> MB
>> 1B
>> 3B
>> .
>> .
>> .
>>Use the next Location to Enter the Engine Code that correspond to the
vehicle in question
>>
>> -- / -- / ---- / ---- / -- / -- / ## / -
>>
>> where ## is replaced with:
>> NC - Normally Aspirated Carburetor
>> TI - Turbo Intercooler
>> T2 - Bi-Turbo
>> 20 - 20V Normally Aspirated
>> 2T - 20V Turbo
>> .
>>
And so on. This form of index should be in every post dealing with a
problem request as per the FAQ that instructs everyone how to benefit from
using the list. Any updates to the index, be they trouble codes or new info
of any sort can easily disseminated via majordomo as an index update.
Anyone on or off the list would receive the index FAQ with their
confirmation of addition.
Put the index after the SIG line in the message pre-set with the standard
details of the sender i.e.: -- / -- / ---- / ---- / -- / ## / ## / #
This part would never change and would have a preset value on any message
that can be altered as needed. No more work by Dan would be required, the
process would be transparent and the members would do the little bit
required to make this work. Any volunteer could update, or be responsible
for receiving recommended updates to the index definition page. Dan needs
only to enable search functions based on a variety of strings.
If I wanted to find a problem relating to door handles in general, I would
search using the code for the part and or part group. The table would be
larger but not really any more difficult to follow. If we assume that door
handles are part of main group 12 - 'body parts' and subgroup 7 - 'trim and
related parts' and the problem is code 6 'broken' as opposed to say code 7
'looks fine but doesn't work' (or something along those lines) we could
create a search for information based on the problem like so:
12 / 07 / ---- / ---- / 06 / -- / -- / -- / -
If I want to get model specific one could then add more:
12 / 07 / ---- / ---- / 06 / 44 / -- / -- / Q
The more I work with this indexing idea the more it seems to make sense and
the simpler it seems. Take someone like Phil who looks for a specific
widget related problem. Let him pick the Part-Component (FT86 - call it a
brake bomb) and he could create a simple query across types and models or
more specific based on details like this;
-- / -- / FT86 / ---- / -- / UR / -- / -- / Q
To use the list you could ignore all this and still do it the old way or to
gain full advantage of it use it with the indexes. When you get a response
from someone who says check the archives, you really can successfully check
the archives! Those in the know would only have to answer a specific
question once and anyone (newbie or vet)should be able search and find with
the same ease.
If this little extra effort is too much for the masses, then too bad... they
will only fail to access the true wealth of knowledge and experience
available here. There are certainly enough hard-core listers who will see
the value of such a system and be willing to contribute to it's
implementation. I certainly will!
Imagine a new lister wanting some general information on common problems for
a specific model. His/her search would simply be:
-- / -- / ---- / ---- / -- / 44 / MC / TI / Q
or
-- / -- / ---- / ---- / -- / 44 / -- / TI / Q
If too much information comes at once he/she could narrow it down to
engine - 01 or body - 12 problems like this:
01 / -- / ---- / ---- / -- / 44 / MC / TI / Q
or
12 / -- / ---- / ---- / -- / 44 / -- / TI / Q
I don't know about you but it's exciting me....
Later,
Peter Berrevoets
1990 200TQ 10V
-----Original Message-----
From: Doyt W. Echelberger [mailto:Doyt@nwonline.net]
Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 1999 9:23 AM
To: peterb@mysysltd.com
Subject: RE: Type 44 list, sublists
I did catch your "Sub-Lists no!" post, and was prompted to toss in my
general support. Yes, my email program will sort first by any header or
body content, then again using 'and/or/unless/ignore' any header or body
text. All I have used so far are header filters. Filtering based on body
text could be very confusing and contradictory.
I am going to summarize what follows, because I really got rolling on this
and maybe rambled some:
In summary: I think people write because they have a PROBLEM (this problem
creates a THREAD such as XXXXX) and other people respond and identify their
response using the thread subject line (RE:XXXXX) and that general process
isn't going to change much. Whatever you and I and Dan and others do will
be to _add_ structure to that thread before sending it out to thousand of
subscribers and before filing it in the archives. We will have to add that
structure using a special header, at the level of audifans.
Anyone could subscribe to audifans, and then modify their subscription to
receive any set of qualifiers. (Much like ONELIST, except we start with a
subscription to _all_ the categories, and every subscriber would have
access to every post and every archive.)
OK, now I'm going to say how I got to my above conclusion, and what the
qualifiers could be.
We are talking about a huge amount of material: Everything already in the
archives, plus everything that will be ever be written in the future, by
thousands of people. Wow.
You said:
"I think that if we use the ETKA structure as a guide, we can start with a
part specific structure that will logically lead into a problem specific and
then model specific order.
So fellow listers, I will gladly volunteer to help index the archives if we
can come up with a structure that is sound, logical and requires no more
than say fifteen characters! Keeping in mind all those posts not relating
to the answering of a specific problem do not need to be read or indexed at
all."
OK Peter, I am guessing that 90% of those future writers won't be able to
deal with a multi-step indexing system at either end of the system....when
they post, or when they try to find something in the archives.
We (you, me, Dan, etc) are going to have to introduce structure to whatever
they write. But it comes to us as a thread.
So, "we" are going to have to create a filtering system that sorts based on
what they _do_ write. And the filters will need to be in the computer that
receives what they write (audifans).
Audifans can then add structure to every post by creating a "sorting
header" before resending the post to the list (and before filing it.) Your
idea of ETKA could be the basis of the qualifiers.
Anyone could then elect to subscribe to any set of sorting criteria that
audifans generates. And any subscriber would have the right to search the
total archives using any set of sorting criteria that they could understand
and activate. But every posting would be available to anyone but not sent
to everyone.
Dan has suggested a basic sorting by model "type":
DAN:["One idea I have is to segment the lists something like this:
several "type" lists: 4k/80/90/CQ, 5k/100/200/S4/S6. But, where does that
leave the urQ? On the 4k list, or on the latter, since it uses a turbo
engine? The real danger in segmenting is that valuable knowledge will
be lost. Phil will read the urQ list but why should he read the 5k
list, since he doesn't have one (applying the logic of those recently crying
for the type 44 list)
Still, segmenting can be done, if we figure out where to draw broad circles.
"Old" cars vs "new"?]
So, Dan is thinking about very broad qualifiers which would allow
subscribers to elect to receive everything written about a whole group of
model-defined cars. This is a broad-brush approach that probably reflects
Dan's opinion of the limited ability of listers to use a common set of
identifiers in the creative step of their writing.
In summary: I think people write because they have a problem (this problem
creates a THREAD such as XXXXX) and other people respond and identify their
response with the thread subject line (RE:XXXXX) and that general process
isn't going to change much. Whatever you and I and Dan and others do will
be to _add_ structure to that thread based on its content, before sending
out to thousand of subscribers and before filing it in the archives. We
will have to add that structure in a special header, at the level of
audifans.
Anyone could subscribe to audifans, and then modify their subscription to
receive any set of qualifiers in the special header. (Much like ONELIST,
except we start with a subscription to _all_ the categories, and every
subscriber would have access to every post and every archive.)
But the audifans majordomo would add the header that makes all posts
sortable out to subscribers, and out to the archives.
Doyt Echelberger
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
At 10:59 PM 6/28/1999 -0400, you wrote:
>I see you are alive and well, I thought this topic might bring in a word or
>two from you.
>
>You may or may not have seen my post "Sub-Lists no!..." But it's time to
get
>your input again. I've been thinking some more about this and (not at 5 am
>though) there's something brewing in the ether just out of my grasp, but I
>have a really good feeling that with a little help the Problem Specific
>Indexes can really work to unify the lists and make them easier to use.
>
>Any ideas?
>
>Peter
>1990 200TQ 10V
>
>How about this:
>(BTW can your e-mail program search strings in the body text?)
>
>T44 - good but 33% longer than needed - 44
>
>Engine - Cooling - Rad Fan - Electrical Failure - Not Working - Type 44 -
>Turbo 10V (MC) - Quattro
>
>Group/SubGroup/Part-Component/Symptom/Symptom Modifier/type/type
>modifier/type modifier/
>
>## / ## / #### / #### / ## / ## / ## / #
>
>so let's make up some codes and we have an index that looks like this:
>
>01/15/RF12/E123/01/44/MC/Q
>
>so that's 26 characters including the separators that would make up the
>first line of the message body in a reply to a question/problem. These
>codes would be pulled from a standard set and do not have to be incredibly
>specific yet could be really powerful.
>
>If someone wants only 200TQ info, they subscribe to the list and indicate
>**/**/****/****/44/MC/Q
>
>If someone wants to post a question to the list - after reading the faq and
>obtaining a copy of the index definitions a question could start
>01/??/????/E123/01/44/??/Q leaving the unknowns either out or forcing the
>would be listers to learn a little bit more about their own cars?
>
>It's an idea that I think can work - what do you think?