cocoon-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Savory <>
Subject Re: [RT] Cocoon's own publishing system
Date Wed, 12 Mar 2003 20:44:54 GMT
On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Diana Shannon wrote:

> > - Getting it done quickly enough that changes to docs in 2.0 don't fall
> > through the cracks. I don't know if we could/should somehow "freeze" 2.0
> > docs during the process. This will depend greatly on likely time to
> > completion.
> I don't see why a freeze would be a problem. Docs simply aren't updated
> that often. :( We could also have a testing/prototype phase using ant
> scripts to pull content from both repositories.

Ok, that's cool. Freezing relevant doc trees is the right way to go then,
as we really don't want people updating the wrong things.

> Why can't we use page-based metadata for versioning? It's not as
> efficient when your content isn't very granular (e.g. page-based as
> above), but it will work well for faqs/snippets/how-tos ATM and more
> complex docs could be refactored down the road (e.g. topic map
> approach). Embedding "since" in one form or the other sounds kind of
> messy (maintenance and editing-wise) to me, unless it's an attribute of
> some kind. Think what it will be like supporting versions 2.0x, 2.1x,
> 2.2x, ... I'm not an expert here, so I'll defer to those with more CMS
> expertise.

Hmm. Just trying to think of the situations that we need to put version
content in, and how it might be used.

As I understand it, we'll have one set of docs, from which we need to
build documentation for 2.0, 2.1, 2.x. So "build docs" on a given version
would ideally either:

- create docs with ONLY content applicable to the version being built
- create docs with flags to say "in version X, ..." (useful for people
to see when they'd need to upgrade/downgrade?)

> > Before you all go "eek!" and run away, most of these fields can be
> > automagically generated either by CVS (contributor, creator, date) or by
> > stylesheets (type and format).
> I looked at this about a year ago and thought it not expressive enough
> for our needs. It's isn't obvious to me how/if the above might handle
> software release versioning. Suggestions?

Not sure I follow you here -- do you mean CVS wasn't expressive enough, or
that Dublin Core wasn't expressive enough?

If you mean the former, yes, I guess CVS may be a bit limited in what it
could do ... we may need to use Ant.

If you mean the latter, we could always use Qualified Dublin Core (ie, add
our own subset of tags for a given field, eg creator, to create a richer
markup scheme to cope with whatever else we need to store).


Andrew Savory                                Email:
Managing Director                              Tel:  +44 (0)870 741 6658
Luminas Internet Applications                  Fax:  +44 (0)700 598 1135
This is not an official statement or order.    Web:

View raw message