discuss: Firewall-HOWTO
Subject:
Re: Firewall-HOWTO
From:
Terrence Enger ####@####.####
Date:
19 Nov 2003 16:01:50 -0000
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.20031119105817.010ef67c@mail.look.ca>
At 18:33 2003-11-18 -0800, David Lawyer wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 10:04:20PM -0800, Tabatha Marshall wrote:
> > On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 09:42, Rodolfo J. Paiz wrote:
> > > Hmm... I see your point perfectly. In general, I try to explain what
I am
> > > doing as I go along such that the user also learns in the process;
however,
> > > I tend to start from the point of view that this document is about
"how to"
> > > do something, and that both (a) the background knowledge which is
> > > prerequisite to this howto and (b) the further learning that can be
> > > undertaken after this howto is completed, are of secondary importance.
> >
> > There is nothing wrong with taking such an approach. Many HOWTOs are
> > written to complete specific tasks.
> >
> > > Is it, then, the traditional view that a HOWTO must also provide some
> > > measure of background such that the reader can start from little or no
> > > knowledge, acquire the basics, then execute the task desired? If so,
how
> > > far back should I start? For example, I would like to assume that the
> > > reader has the following skills:
> > >
> > > * some knowledge of RPM package commands
> > >
> > > * ability to install and configure a machine with Linux,
> > > including setting up his/her own networking devices
> > >
> > > * ability to connect his/her system to the Internet
> > > using whatever device/medium the ISP provides
> > >
> > > If I have to explain some or all of that, I'll never get done writing
my
> > > own stuff...
>
> I'm not sure that a prerequisite section is needed. Readers will find
> out for themselves if they need to learn more from other sources. It's
> easy to use a search engine, etc., to find out such information. The
> only case where I think that prerequisites need to be mentioned is when
> they are rather advanced. The 3 items shown above should be known (or
> readily learned) by most users of the proposed HOWTO. It can be a
> burden to the reader to find a long list of detailed prerequisites
> and some readers are able to cope without the prerequisites.
I think that it is useful to list prerequisite knowledge
explicitly.
(*) It gives the reader an opportunity to collect
prerequisite readings before sitting down with the
original HOWTO. This could reduce the number of times
the reader needs to be online: not all of us always have
convenient access to the 'net. And, some of us just
like to work that way.
(*) Before doing any heavy reading, the reader can have a
better idea of the amount of work in front of her. She
can choose when to do the reading or even whether to do
it at all. <aside>We, in general, still sometimes
behave as though information is a scarce commodity. It
is time to recognize that the really scarce commodity is
attention.</aside>
I can see some value in segregating prerequisites from
"further reading". The former serves the reader with a task
to accomplish, the latter is a headstart for the reader who
thinks "This is really neat. I want to learn more."
Just my C$0.02.
Terry.
Available for contract programming.
>
> > Most authors will include a "Prerequisites" section explaining skills or
> > hardware required to do the task. You can list the above, and provide
> > additional links there, or point to a "Resources" section for links
> > where the reader can get additional information on those items.
>>
> David Lawyer
