Although having the "option" for links is a neat one, why even bother with it as an option? Why not just have the links work?

The only difference it makes in the printed version is that the TOCs are underlined. Why not just have them on all the time? Surely it can't be a bad thing to have the TOC entries underlined in the printout? Anyone?

Has anyone ever thought of making a minature din-sized printer for the empeg? Perhaps a scanner aswell?

Great!

However: sorry, to bring this up again, but the printable FAQ won't display with Netscape 4.x.

The rather concise hyperlinks from the switch page (HREF="?links=1") and (HREF="?links=2") are not padded onto the base hyperlink http://www.riocar.org/printfaq.php, but instead added to the server name http://www.riocar.org/, resulting in http://www.riocar.org/?links=1 and http://www.riocar.org/?links=2, respectively. This is how I would expect it to work anyway. Internet Explorer is sloppy on this and constructs the follow-up links as intended.

So, you will have to at least write HREF="printfaq.php?links=1" unless you want to keep off all Netscape 4.x users.

However, the switch page is simply odd and doesn't go well with such a well-designed site. Why not make two separate hyperlinks in the first place?

Something like this:

Printable version of the entire FAQ: with and without intra-document hyperlinks.

Georg

Grr, thats actually not IE sloppyness, it's a bug in Netscape 4.x. 6.x fixes it. It's not easy to tell this, but I have an old test page set up for this when I found it a while back.

The whole printable FAQ is just a hack into the site right now. Everytime I sit down to do v2 of the site, I get distracted on something like this, and it adds more code into the migration nightmare.

I'll look into a quick fix someday.

There are those of us who are afraid of the migration, and are secretly plotting against you to delay it as long as possible.