> In article <19950908.004110.99@arnod.arnod.demon.co.uk>,
> Julian Arnold <jools@arnod.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >More opinions are needed I think. Someone e-mailed me asking that the
> >authoring systems section of the FAQ not get too large. I agree, and so I
[snip]
> Which brings me to a potentially controversial point: should the FAQ
> list recommend some systems over others. I beleive that it should. I
> think it would be a disservice if readers of the FAQ if they came away
> with the impression that writing a game in figment would reach as large
> an audience as a game in TADS. How to choose which systems to
> recommend is difficult. I think my choices are apparent. Anyone else?
We have a TADS/Inform comparison paper. Could the IF FAQ simply list the
various systems with some pertinent info (available on which computers
systems in general, current support by system author(s), etc) and then
refer to a system FAQ like the TADS/Inform comparison that expounds on each
system? Would current authors and porters be willing to contribute to
a second FAQ of this type? Would users of systems no longer supported be
willing to describe those systems?
If there is interest, I'd be willing to maintain a system FAQ.